The significance thresholds were defined as statistically not significant (#), statistically significant (*p < .05), highly significant (**p < .01), or extremely significant (***p < .001).
Excerpts
Regarding both PR and p53 expression, the difference between the LMS group and the three non-sarcomatous groups was highly significant (p < 0.001).
A likelihood-ratio test comparing the model with a standard logistic regression model was highly significant (likelihood ratio test=1466.50; p<0.001).
To further solidify the molecular signatures of the subgroups 1–4, we performed RNA-based single-sample GSEA, which demonstrated robust and highly significant enrichment of the gene sets “stemness”, “synapse assembly”, “gonadotrophs” and “secretory vesicle”, respectively ( p < 0.001; Fig. 2d and Supplementary Data 5a–d ).
p < 0.05 was considered significant; p < 0.01 was highly significant; p < 0.001 was very highly significant. 3.
It achieved highly significant improvements (F = 428.31, df = 2, P = 0.001) in consistent condom use behaviour among participants assigned to the combination of peer education and manager training [ 58 ] .
The differences in leaf IG concentration among this set of genotypes were highly significant ( F[12,102] = 11.03, P < 0.001).
Significance levels were assessed as follows: * p < 0.05 (significant), ** p < 0.01 (highly significant), *** p < 0.001 (extremely significant) and **** p ≤ 0.0001 (extremely significant) or non-significant ( p > 0.05). 5.
By 2-sided Fisher exact test, the association of anti-NPC with AIM was highly significant: for AIM versus all disease and normal controls, OR 42.4 (95% CI 2.3–796), p = 0.001; AIM vs disease controls only, OR 36.7 (95% CI 1.96–688), p = 0.0016.
A p < 0.05 indicated significant (*), p < 0.01 indicated highly significant (**), and p < 0.001 indicated extremely highly significant (***) difference. 3.
Whereas the studies conducted before 2007 did not reveal significant differences ( p = 0.479), PTSD in studies conducted after 2007 had highly significant lower salivary cortisol levels than their comparison groups (SMD = − 0.48, 95% Cl − 0.75; − 0.20, p = 0.001).
ANOVA of multi-environments showed that differences of genotype were highly significant ( p < 0.001; Supplementary Table S2 ).
S8 ) revealed a clear asymmetrical plot with Egger's test confirming the presence of publication bias with highly significant P<0.001.
Respectively Group B and E are the highly significant values in this investigation ( P <0.001).
Our results ( Table 3 ) revealed that there was a highly significant difference in total time spent in sedentary activity ( p < 0.001) and in the total sedentary activity counts ( p < 0.001) in the control group compared with the ASD group.
When we compared the three groups based on the K/L score, only SOD2 showed a significant trend towards proportionally higher serum levels in both groups B (K/L grade II and III) and C (K/L grade IV) than in group A (K/L grade 0 and I) (p < 0.001) (Table 3 ).
We found a highly significant positive correlation between CD4/CD25% and FT3 ( r = 0.791, p = 0.001).
However, MK-801 in these same doses produced highly significant ( P < 0.001) reductions in the rate of tumor growth, to almost 60% that of controls, over the course of the study ( Figure 5b ).
This increasing trend is highly significant with p -value < 0.001 (Table 2 ) 25 .
At F21, the CIf/CIm difference was also highly significant for both high and unselected lines ( P <0.001) whereas it was reduced in the low discrimination lines ( P <0.05).
Correlation of miR-101 expression with OS and subgroup analysis Highly significant heterogeneity (I 2 = 68.6%, p<0.001) was detected when 19 studies were pooled.
The most pronounced effect was observed at 5 μg/mL, with a median length of 34.33 μm and a highly significant difference (*** p < 0.001), where cells exhibited a compact, short bipolar spindle‐like morphology (see Figure 3 ).
Using our validated histological scoring system, we were able to detect significantly more villous distortion and total inflammation in TNF i∆ARE/i∆ARE → SCID mice compared to wt → SCID mice, and a strong trend towards more chronic inflammation as well (villous distortion index: 4.00 ± 0.00 vs. 2.00 ± 0.00, P<0.001; chronic inflammatory index: 4.5 ± 1.05 vs. 0.75 ± 0.75, P=0.06; total inflammatory score: 9.25 ± 1.19 vs. 3.25 ± 1.25, P<0.05).
A paired-sample t-test comparing N1 and MMNm latencies of the left (mean latencies of all subjects: MMNm peak: 164.5 ms, N1 peak: 124.0 ms) and right (MMNm peak: 165.6 ms, N1 peak: 125.6 ms) hemisphere in the perceptual condition reveal a highly significant difference between the latencies of those two components [left hemisphere: t (25) = 5.563, p <.001, right hemisphere: t (25) = 7.132, p <.001], showing that the MMNm peaks are not intermixed with the N1 peaks.
These results show a highly significant difference between both groups (5.81×10 4 ±0.7 compared to 1.93×10 4 ±0.09, p<0.001).