The logistic regression model was highly significant ( P < 0.001) having a Nagelkerke R Square of 0.2.
Excerpts
Results Our results showed highly significant increase in the level of lipid peroxidation in group IV when com pared to the control group, group II and group III (p<0.001).
There were also highly significant correlations demonstrated between MSS and NED colonoscopy comfort score ( P < .001), polyp detection rate ( P < .001), and cecal intubation rate ( P < .001).
Regarding the Metabolic Index (UH 2 /U) Boisdron-Celle et al 2007, 24 demonstrated that the UH 2 /U ratio is inversely correlated to the observed toxicity, and that the correlation is highly significant (p < 0.001).
G3 and G4 groups were higher than the control G2 (+Ve), while G4 showed a highly significant difference ( p < 0.001) compared to the control G2 (+Ve).
Results in Table 7 show highly significant differences in pollen viability between the genotypes (p < 0.001). 3.4.
There was a significant difference ( p = 0.007) between the control group and the T2 tumour stage, and a highly significant difference ( p < 0.001) between the control group and the T3 and T4 stages.
Female sex showed a decreasing trend (36.45% to 35.09%, p=0.001) of admissions while an increasing trend was noted in males (41.85% to 46.64%, p=0.001) and ethnicities except for Native Americans.
This change in CIE a* and b* affected the hue angle; after 20 d of room-temperature storage, the hue-angle value of LTS 50D was below 40, a highly significant difference compared to LTS 0D ( p < 0.001) ( Figure 5 E), indicating that the fruit skin color is more red.
Additionally, a highly significant negative correlation (r = −0.87, p < 0.001) exists between clay and silt fractions.
Filtered water was highly significant with Hepatitis A with P -value of <.001.
In addition, the results of search.conv clarify that when birds inhabit saline environments, the kidney size and SSGs in different lineages tend to be similar (found highly significant under “state,” p = 0.001).
For all METTLs, d S was significantly greater than d N and all Z -tests for selection (i.e., HA: d N < d S ) were highly significant ( P value < 0.001) ( table 3 ).
The contribution of year, genotype and their interaction to the date of budbreak were all highly significant ( p -value< 0.001).
A statistically significant negative correlation was found between the subscales of DASS-21 and the four domains of the QoL, with the social relationships and psychological domains showing a highly significant association (p < 0.001).
This effect was highly significant (F = 15.9, p < 0.001) overall.
There was also a highly significant difference between different income classification of countries ( P < 0.001), with a longer median length of excretion for high-income countries (2.5 years, 95% CI: 1.3–3.7) than upper-middle income countries (1.0 year, 95% CI: 0.9–1.3), lower-middle income countries (1.0 years, 95% CI: 0.8–1.5), and low-income countries (0.8 years) (Figure 3 C).
Attachment insecurity to fathers predicted highly significant increased cost (p = 0.001), as did CU traits.
Molecular Interactions Ingenuity based pathway analysis revealed highly significant overlap with 92 canonical pathways with p<0.001 and a total of 196 canonical pathways p<0.05.
The main effect for the line length factor was highly significant, F (7,133) = 118, p < 0.001.
Both immediate post-intervention and follow-up results revealed a highly significant improvement in the green transformational leadership knowledge levels ( p < 0. 001).
The difference in JND was highly significant after adaptation to fast translational motion (baseline vs 20 Hz translation: p < 0.001) and marginally significant after adaptation to fast circular motion (baseline vs 20 Hz circular: p = 0.06).
Our rate of 33.3% was highly significant as well as the 22.7% (χ 2 = 10.80, P < 0.001) of Slijepcevic and cols.
We also found a highly significant effect of stimulus type on mean accuracy by comparing the reduced model with a random-intercept only model (χ 2 (1) = 23.34, P < 0.001; ΔAIC = 21.34), with shape stimuli decreasing accuracy by 0.146 ± 0.025 (standard error) compared to color stimuli.
This resulted in a highly significant adjusted group difference (-20.1, 95% CI: -30.0, -10.1; P < 0.001).