Barely Significant

Excerpts

514,629 sentences

highly significantp < 0.00010.0× alphaqualifiedgold
described that the ACQ score significantly decreased from 3.58 ± 1.28 to 2.01 ± 1.05 after 16 weeks (−43.7%), treatment responders showed greater and highly significant improvements of symptoms compared with non-responders even after 16 weeks (−46.9%, p < 0.0001 vs −36.1%, p < 0.05) [ 16 ].
highly significantp < 0.00010.0× alphaqualifiedgold
ty} \oddsidemargin -1.0in \begin{document} \chi_{\left(1 \right)}^2 = \,\,\frac{{{{\left({532\,\, \times \,\,53\,\, - 13\,\, \times \,\,73} \right)}^2}\, \times \,\,671}}{{545\,\, \times \,\,126\,\, \times \,\,605\,\, \times \,\,66}} = 181.7 \end{document} The large chi-squared value evidenced a highly significant association between postoperative nausea and vomiting in surgical patients ( p < 0.0001), and the hypothesis of independence between the two symptoms was rejected.
Biostatistics: Facing the Interpretation of 2 × 2 Tables.
J Belg Soc Radiol · 2017 · PMC6251079
highly significantp <.00010.0× alphaqualifiedgold
These analyses collectively illustrate a clear separation between the two intensity conditions, despite considerable distributional overlap, highlighting the robust influence of stimulus intensity on the ratings. Turning to the stimulus duration factor, it had a highly significant main effect on duration ratings, F (1, 728) = 199.45, p <.0001, η p 2 = 0.17 (Table 4 ), also confirming the hypothesis.
Furthermore, multivariate analysis revealed that the differences was significant between groups I and III in OS, and also had a tendency toward statistical significance in TTR (training cohort, OS, P < 0.0001 and TTR, P = 0.069; validation cohort, OS, P = 0.001 and TTR, P = 0.001) ( Table S5 ).