Barely Significant

Excerpts

514,629 sentences

a significant trendp = 0.0040.1× alphagold
A significant trend across incidence quintiles was observed between prevalence figures for all treated chronic illnesses and for treated diabetes (p = 0.004 and p<10 −4, respectively), the proportion of the population living in rural areas (p<10 −4 ), the unemployment rate (p<10 −4 ), the FDep index (p = 0.02), the LP
highly significantp = 0.00400.1× alphaqualifiedgold
Since our main goal was to test the background similarity hypothesis, we pooled the same-background conditions (V–V and Λ–Λ) and pooled the orthogonal background conditions (Λ–V and V–Λ) without excluding any subject, and found that the difference between the two pooled data sets was highly significant ( p = 0.0040, t = 3.62, df = 11). 3.3.
highly significantp = 0.0040.1× alphaqualifiedgold
The analysis results revealed that the four exercise groups (STR, BFR, COMB, and CON) had a highly significant impact on PV (F(1, N) = 6.366, p = 0.004, η**2 = 0.097), MV (F(1, N) = 9.573, p = 0.000, η**2 = 0.134), and MP (F(1, N) = 10.037, p = 0.000, η**2 = 0.137), and a significant impact on PP (F(1, N) = 3.277, p = 0.014, η**2 = 0.051).
highly significantp = 0.0040.1× alphaqualifiedgold
Interestingly, an exploratory test indicated that this effect was driven by a highly significant increase in the participants ( n = 28) who accessed the online tutorials on OOW at least once ( p = 0.004, d = 0.60), while participants who did not engage with the online tutorials ( n = 28) did not show any substantial or significant change in CNS scores, p > 0.5, d = 0.13.
highly significantp =0.0040.1× alphaqualifiedgold
After adjustment, the association between rs1894116 and survival outcomes remained highly significant for both OS ( p =0.004) and CSS ( p =0.002) (Table I), indicating that this variant provides prognostic information beyond conventional clinical predictors.
highly significantp = 0.0040.1× alphaqualifiedgold
For the repeating sequence condition, the retrieval matching activation was not significantly different from the maintenance activation (F(1, 18) = 2.03, p = 0.172, η p 2 = 0.10) in contrast to the highly significant maintenance to retrieval increase for the non-matching retrieval phase (F(1, 18) = 11.21, p = 0.004, η p 2 = 0.38).