In the stratified analysis of study design, a favorable trend still existed in non-RCTs, with an RR of 3.68 and 95% CI [2.34–5.79] ( P < 0.001, fixed-effects model).
Excerpts
ANOVA showed that sample type had a highly significant effect on CUPRAC ( p < 0.001), and post hoc comparisons indicated that spray samples differed significantly from the lowest categories ( p < 0.05).
We found a highly significant effect of electrode site on saccade direction (p ≪ 0.001, F = 84.14, d.f. = 3, see Fig. 2 ), but also the stimulation current impacted the direction (p < 0.001, F = 16.39, d.f. = 1) as well as the interaction of current and electrode (p < 0.001, F = 6.94, d.f. = 3), indicating that the rotational change induced by a higher current was not consistent across electrodes.
All symptom reductions within 1 year were found to be highly significant (on a significance level of p < .001) and of moderate effect size (range: depression, d = .41 to PTSS, d = .52).
One-way ANOVA analysis of AUC revealed that I/O curve downshift by 0.1 μg/mL LPS was not significant, but highly significant by 0.2, 0.5 and 1.0 μg/mL LPS ( P <0.001, Fig. 1A ).
The independent-samples t -test showed a highly significant difference ( t = −20.001, p < 0.001), further confirmed by the Mann-Whitney U test (U = 0, p = 0.008).
Each model elaboration was highly significant so it was the final model that was employed in the assessment of the hypotheses of interest [χ 2 (1) = 10, p = 0.001; χ 2 (5) = 55, p < 0.0005].
There was a highly significant difference in distances travelled by caterpillars before and after parasitoid egression (Wilcoxon Matched Pairs test: V = 153, P<0.001).
Differences in CI between the two measuring methods did not reach significance, whereas the calculated CVAI showed a 0.74-fold decrease using 3D digital photography and was highly significant ( p < 0.001).
The frequency-dependent differences at 3, 4 and 6 kHz, which statistically describe the observed drop in the hearing curve are highly significant ( p < 0.001).
A moderate, highly significant negative correlation was observed between FLAIR and FA (ρ = −0.345, p < 0.001, R 2 = 0.170).
RM-ANOVA showed a decreasing trend of the groin, leg, and back pain in the EG in the second to sixth hours after the trial (P < 0.001 for each area of pain measured), while in the CG groin, leg and back pain had an increasing trend (P < 0.001 for each area of pain measured) (Fig. 2 , 3 , 4 ).
The following correlations were highly significant: IPDE paranoid and attachment (0.443, p< 0.001), cognitive (0.359, p< 0.001), dominance (0.381, p< 0.001), emotional (0.398, p< 0.001), and total (0.386, p< 0.001); IPDE antisocial and behavioural (0.42, p< 0.001), cognitive (0.377, p< 0.001), dominance (0.354, p< 0.001), emotional (0.348, p< 0.001
John’s wort, and PPIs, statistically highly significant differences ( p < 0.001) were observed in each case.
C 4 ) was highly significant ( p < 0.001), and so it was between the roots of the C 3 and C 4 plants ( p < 0.001).
A significance threshold of P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant, P < 0.01 denoted highly significant differences, and P < 0.001 signified extremely significant differences in the context of statistical analysis.
As illustrated in Figure 3 , the analysis revealed a highly significant main effect of SES with a medium effect size, F (1,804) = 83.8, p < .001, η p 2 = .09 and time, F (1,804) = 36.8, p < .001, η p 2 = .05, but there was no significant effect of language group nor reliable interactions between language group, SES and time ( p > .05).
The inter-subject test revealed highly significant differences for focal search (F(1,18) = 14.82, p<0.001) and direct swimming (F(1,18) = 23.31, p<0.001) as well as significant differences for scanning (F(1,18) = 5.78, p<0.05) and perseverance (F(1,18) = 9.87, p<0.05).
In the statistical analysis treatment × time interaction was highly significant (p = 0.001).
Follow-up of this (occasion × trial type) interaction showed no effect of trial type or block at baseline ( p values >0.20) but a highly significant main effect of trial type [ F (1,14) = 17.54, p = 0.001, ηρ 2 = 0.56], showing much faster RTs during pattern trials than random trials over the entire experiment (random trials: mean = 0.33 s, SEM = 0.39; pattern trials: mean = 0.298 s, SEM = 0.034) at follow-up in this group (Table 3 ).
For female breast cancer, the large declines in incident cases observed from March to November 2020, except for September, remained highly significant ( p < 0.001) during May, July and August 2020 when IRRs were adjusted for age and area-level income deprivation.
Results: GOSE assessments showed an increasing trend by the comparison of on-discharge (7.47 ± 1.30), within a month (7.51 ± 1.30) and within 3 months (7.58 ± 1.21) evaluations ( P < 0.001).
The pooled OR from the random-effects model is 1.53, with a 95% CI of 1.107 to 1.945 and a highly significant p -value of <0.001.
Recycling for 1 h under basal conditions resulted in a 20.5% increase in SSTR2 surface levels, but remarkably, in the presence of CRF, this number rose to 64.0%, a highly significant (P < 0.001) 43.5% increase as compared with 1-h recycling in the absence of CRF ( Fig. 9, A and B ).
Reanalyzing for main effects only (no interaction), the Sex effect was highly significant (p < 0.001) for both the two-Age-interval and three-Age-interval analyses (effect estimate = 0.96 and 0.94 words/min for the two analyses respectively).