Barely Significant

Excerpts

514,629 sentences

highly significantp < 0.0010.0× alphaqualifiedgold
The first four entries of Table 2 indicate that the efficiency is most dependent upon the amplicon and relatively less on cDNA samples, as indicated by high F values, both of these effects being highly significant ( p < 0.001).
Statistical significance of quantitative PCR.
BMC Bioinformatics · 2007 · PMC1868764
highly significantp<0.0010.0× alphaqualifiedgold
This is highly significant (p<0.001) - we did not detect a similarly sized or larger coherent network with 1,000 randomly selected gene sets of the same size – and suggests that a large portion of the genes that are differentially expressed between the LG/J and SM/J strains are co-ordinately regulated in mouse muscle independent of strain.
highly significantp = 0.0010.0× alphaqualifiedgold
Further confirming the visual impression, planned post-hoc one-tailed t-tests on CS+>CS− difference scores showed no significant activation during early conditioning [UF-Cond1: t(16) = 0.28, p = 0.393], an already significant, though rather weak, reaction during late conditioning [UF-Cond2: t(16) = 2.11, p = 0.025] and a strong and highly significant reaction to the CS+ during testing [UF-Test: t(16) = 3.81, p = 0.001].
highly significantP<0.0010.0× alphaqualifiedgold
The variance in allele sizes ( Vp ) is relatively variable among population groups, especially so for the Frequency dataset ( Figure 2A ), and the differences for this last dataset are indeed highly significant (Kruskal-Wallis test, P<0.001 ).
a decreasing trendP < .0010.0× alphagold
The overall median completion rate was 60.1% (IQR, 37.9%-81.0%); this rate was slightly lower during home care vs inpatient stay (57.5% [IQR, 30.7%-85.9%] vs 65.0% [IQR, 49.6%-92.5%], respectively; P = .01), with a decreasing trend over time (65.6% [IQR, 51.6%-85.9%] for the first 90 days vs 42.9% [IQR, 29.3%-82.3%] for beyond 90 days; P < .001).
highly significantP < 0.0010.0× alphaqualifiedgold
The following statistical formulas were used: (1) Chi square test: (1) χ 2 = Σ ( O − E ) 2 E , where O is observed frequency and E is expected frequency and (2) level of significance: “ P ” is level of significance P > 0.05 is not significant, P < 0.05 is significant, P < 0.01 is highly significant, and P < 0.001 is very highly significant. 3.
highly significantp < 0.0010.0× alphaqualifiedgold
Also results of the current study showing a highly significant (p < 0.001) increase in the levels of whole blood WBCs count (14.38 ± 6.06) and neutrophils count (79.26 ± 5.57) when compared with mild to moderate patients (10.03 ± 4.17 & 73.76 ± 7.19; respectively); while lymphocytes count (14.21 ± 5.13) was highly significantly (p < 0.001) decreased when compa