These improvements were found to be highly significant ( p < 0.001) using Bhapkar’s test.
Excerpts
The results of the two-way ANOVA for the relative theta cycle amplitude demonstrated highly significant effects for both time ( F 4,23592 = 137.27, p < 0.001) and potentiation ( F 2,23592 = 36.91, p < 0.001) factors, as well as for their interaction ( F 8,23592 = 5.24, p < 0.001).
even-numbered trials for each condition, these were highly significant for both tasks [jitter: r = 0.85, p < 0.001; rate: r = 0.96, p < 0.001].
At 8 d after L5T CATX activity increased strongly and highly significant (p ≤ 0.001) in the lumbar segment (Fig. 4B ; 59% compared to sham, 90% compared to naive).
Covariates with an indication for sex trends Of all the sociodemographic factors assessed for sex differences, we found the age of the patient, educational attainment, occupational status, and outcome at discharge showing a significant trend (p<0.001).
The correlation between the CEQ total score and OBN mean score shows a highly significant negative relationship of moderate strength (r = -.31, p < .001).
The Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin measure of sampling adequacy was 0.944, which is above the recommended value of 0.60, and the Bartlett’s test of sphericity was found to be highly significant ( p < 0.001).
Highly significant differences (p < 0.001) were found at the different plant growth stages, watering regime (WR) within plant growth stage, and day within WR and plant growth stage.
There was a highly significant correlation between membrane capacitance and NAS sensitivity of the eEPSCs in the SON neurons (correlation coefficient = 0.8, n = 19, p < 0.001; Fig. 5 ).
The analysis of the interrater reliability between all three examiners in accordance to the Twitter post rating presented a high concordance with 86% and a highly significant P value of p = 0.001.
The analysis of fixed effects revealed that the overall model was highly significant (F(92,36) = 2.758, p < 0.001), indicating that the predictor variables explained a significant portion of the variation in specimen abundance.
A significant trend towards decreased total IgE concentrations for increasing exposure periods (p < 0.001) was observed for the group of MDI-exposed subjects.
Algal amendment (Amend) had a highly significant impact onplant growth ( P < 0.001).
These analyses yielded highly significant associations (P<0.001) and are illustrated in Figure 7D-7I .
On the other, feeding caused highly significant lethal effects (>70%) on the two lepidopteran species ( H. armigera : t = −25.98; df = 11; P < 0.001; L. dispar : t = −30.94; df = 11; P < 0.001), a moderate effect (58.3%) on M. domestica ( t = −20.63; df = 11; P < 0.001) and just a slight effect (21.7%) on C. capitata ( t = −8.37; df = 11; P < 0.
pRDA further confirmed that the successional effect remained highly significant ( F = 57.19, p = 0.001) after statistically controlling for topographic covariates, while low variance inflation factors (VIF < 1.5) ensured the absence of multicollinearity among predictors.
The relative glomerular fibrosis in control group was 4.02 ± 0.4% and 61.7 ± 3.4% in the MTX group with highly significant difference between them ( p < 0.001).
In addition, there were highly significant centre effects on inattentive symptoms (Q = 88.37, p < .001), hyperactive/impulsive symptoms (Q = 93.53, p < .001), and a significant gender by centre effect for the number of inattention symptoms (Q = 103.8, p < .001) but not for the number of hyperactive/impulsive symptoms.
The extract showed a highly significant effect ( p < 0.001) at both doses compared to the control group, with outcomes comparable to those observed with the standard drug diazepam (Table 2 ). 3.2.2 Light Dark Test In the Light‐Dark Box Test, administration of APSME at 200 and 400 mg/kg significantly prolonged light box exploration time compared to controls, supporting its anxiolytic efficacy ( p < 0.001).
Overall, there was a highly significant linear trend from 7 to 11, p < .001.
Two variables had moderately significant positive correlations, that is, weight (r = 0.365, p ≤ 0.001) and BMI (r = 0.345, p ≤ 0.001).
Three levels of significance were used to define significance: significant at p < 0.05, very significant at p < 0.01, and highly significant at p < 0.001.
Importantly, all factor loadings for the latent variables were highly significant at the p < 0.001 level, ranging from 0.502 to 0.874.
The results were compared with those of a reference drug (indomethacin), and the differences between the means were considered not significant when P >0.05, significant when 0.05> P >0.01, highly significant when 0.01> P >0.001, and very highly significant when P <0.001.
In line with our prediction, we saw that while in the true chase condition, socialness ratings increased with chase directness ( b = 0.471, p < .001), in the invisible chase condition, if anything, there was a slight trend in the opposite direction (socialness ratings decreased as directness increased; b = −0.146, p < .001; Supplementary Figure S3b ).