Excerpts

The remaining two paths allowed to vary across mothers and fathers failed to achieve significance at p ≤ .001 in either group but improved the fit nonetheless. 7.2.

However, after adjusting for age, the difference between the MN frequency in males and females was highly significant (p < 0.001).

The mean reduction in recession depth in group B was 2.04 ± 0.56 mm at the end of three months and 1.82 ± 0.49 mm at the end of six months, both of which were also statistically highly significant ( P < 0.001).

The significance of its predictive power for lymph node metastasis is highly significant ( p <0.001, chi-square) and outlined in Table 4 .

Chi-square values reveal highly significant differences (p < 0.001) in all outcomes.

Level of significance P is level of significance P > 0.05: Not significant P < 0.05: Significant P < 0.01: Highly significant P < 0.001: Very highly significant.

By day 13, the reduction in OD 600 for these doses was highly significant compared to the untreated control ( p ≤ 0.001).

Interestingly, a difference with respect to the HC group was already evident in the MS patients with EDSS = 0 (p = 0.049) and became highly significant starting from the group of MS patients with EDSS 1−2 (p<0.001).

Finally, the differences were highly significant in one case, cmlA_2 , with p < 0.001.

This regression model explained 44.2% of the variance in cognitive scores (R-squared = 0.442), with a highly significant fit (F = 12,700, P < 0.001).

As the correlation between pull-out force and pull-out force per area was found to be highly significant and very strong (Pearson’s correlation coefficient R = 0.970, p < 0.001), pull-out force was used as the only biomechanical parameter for the remaining animals. 2.6.

This association was particularly strong from D7, where multivariate analysis (including all clinical confounders) identified mHLA-DR expression as a highly significant independent predictor of infection (OR: 12.1, p < 0.001), alongside the MELD score before LT.

The annual emphysema increase for all subjects (irrespective of smoking status) was highly significant (p<0.001) and was 1.07% of the total lung volume per year.

In each case, the relationship was highly significant for crown age ( r = 0.43–0.47, P < 0.001) but nonsignificant or weakly significant ( r = 0.02–0.09, P = 0.01–0.82) using stem age (see Materials and Methods).

Moreover, a highly significant ( P =0.001) decrease in HbA1c was observed following 90 days of GKB extract supplementation as add-on treatment with Met ( Table 2 ).

The Chi-square test revealed a highly significant association between dietitians’ baseline knowledge and their self-reported clinical practices ( p < 0.001).

For cataracts, we observed a highly significant association between increasing age and the frequency of cataracts ( P < 0.001) with female sex as a relevant risk factor [odds ratio for women versus men = 1.76 (1.28–2.41), P < 0.001].

When controlled for P3 amplitude, the relationship between prediction error and learning rate remained highly significant (path c’ , p < .001), implying a partial rather than a full mediation.

The first-order items A and D exhibited a highly significant effect ( p < 0.001), while the second-order item D2 demonstrated a significant effect ( p < 0.05).

Differences were deemed not significant at p -values > 0.05, significant at p -values < 0.05 (marked as “*”), significant at p -values < 0.01 (marked as “**”), and highly significant at p -values < 0.001 (marked as “***”). 3.

The time taken for the onset of analgesia recorded in different groups varied and the difference were very highly significant ( P < 0.001).

For patient 28 the difference between the means for the 2 sides was highly significant (p<0.001 on Grubb’s test, and outside the outer fence on Tukey’s test), indicating that this patient was an outlier from the other patients in terms of side variation.

The reduction was highly significant when compared with the control group ( p < 0.001), confirming effective induction of leukopenia.

In models accounting for population structure (model-B), the effect of population structure was highly significant for all studied traits ( p < 0.001), except for CELL and HEM (Table S1).

The two measurements showed an extremely significant association ( r = 0.864; P = 0.001.