Barely Significant

Excerpts

514,629 sentences

highly significantP value of < 0.0010.0× alphaqualifiedgold
Demographic characteristics of the study subjects The prevalence of Proteus was higher in catheterized UTI patients (28.2%; 55/195) than in non-catheterized patients (14.9%; 48/321); which was highly significant (P value of < 0.001).
highly significantP < 0.0010.0× alphaqualifiedgold
Chi square test results revealed that the genotypic frequency varied highly significant (P < 0.001) when compared between Ischemic stroke patients and control group: Wild genotype (CC) was more common in cases while controls had more frequent polymorphic (TT) and heterozygous (CT) genotypes indicating that subjects wild genotype were more susceptible to develop Ischemic stroke.
highly significantp < 0.0010.0× alphaqualifiedgold
The TFC in different extracts is presented in Figure 2 , with the highest TFC found in the 75% glycerol extract (25.52 ± 1.35 mg RTE/g) and the lowest in the 25% ethyl acetate extract (2.13 ± 0.28 mg RTE/g), showing highly significant differences among the various extract TFCs ( p < 0.001).
highly significantp value < 0.0010.0× alphaqualifiedgold
RESULTS The results were subjected for appropriate statistical analysis; the Kruskall–Wallis test revealed that an intergroup comparison of the mean percentage of tubule occlusion was highly significant ( p value < 0.001) ( Table 1 ) and Mann–Whitney U test showed that the tubule occlusion potential was statistically significant among all groups except for Group II and IV, which was not significant ( Table 2 and Fig. 1 ).
highly significantP < 0.0010.0× alphaqualifiedgold
The highly significant result of the Hosmer‐Lemeshow test ( P < 0.001), indicating a poor goodness of fit, is most likely explained by the large sample size and should be interpreted with caution. 23 Based on the calibration curve and the bootstrap resampling, the internal validation was considered satisfactory.
highly significantp < 0.0010.0× alphaqualifiedgold
The pseudo R 2 value of 0.08 indicates that 8% of the variations in common bean use are explained by the independent variables included in the regression model, while the Chi-square value of 37.94 is likely highly significant ( p < 0.001), suggesting a strong explanatory power of the model.