Time effects were highly significant for all traits ( p < 0.001), reflecting normal growth.
Excerpts
The differences between exercisers and non-exercisers remained highly significant for transportation time ( p < 0.001), occupational time and METs ( p < 0.001), structured exercise time and METs ( p < 0.001), and moderate-intensity time and METs ( p < 0.001).
Furthermore, the main operational parameters and the interaction effects of some parameters are all highly significant (p ≤ 0.001).
The intercept was highly significant (p < 0.001), suggesting that the model's intercept, which represents the baseline value of “QoL," significantly differs from zero.
Phylogenetic distance was also highly significant in the model (−1.66, P value <0.001).
This improvement was highly significant, with a mean difference of 0.94 (pooled SD = 0.98), a t -value of −24.862 (df = 2530), P < .001, and an effect size of −0.48.
All pairwise F st values were highly significant ( p < 0.001), ranging from 0.009 (between FJDYS and FJFHS) to 0.234 (between V‐HB and ZJJD; Table 5 ).
Acoustic startle response measured in another cohort of mice (9 controls and 10 mutants aged 9 weeks) showed an altered curve: there was a highly significant interaction between genotype and startle pulse intensity (F (7,11) = 4.153, p<0.001), and Bonferroni posthoc tests revealed a significantly lower response of mutants at maximum dB (p<0.01, Fig. 2F ).
Both PFS and OS were highly significant between two groups (P < 0.001) (Figure 1 ).
One-way ANOVA revealed that crack depth had an extremely significant effect on R -value ( F (10, 429) = 35.5, p < 0.001).
The combination of meropenem + piperacillin + tazobactam reduced the bacterial cell density to 41.7% at 50 μg/mL concentration, proving highly significant ( p < 0.001).
Increases of Si concentration were found to be highly significant ( p < 0.001) for vegetative tissue in case of medium (Si-10) and high application rates (Si-50) and for root tissue only in the latter case.
There was a moderate, but highly significant, correlation between SCD activity index and waist circumference (r = 0.22, p < 0.001).
Across tertiles of TG/HDL-C ratio, there was a significant trend of higher conventional lipid parameters such as non-HDL-C*, TC/HDL-C ratio*, TG*, HDL-C*, TC**; and non-lipid parameters body-fat* and BMI*** (* P < 0.001, ** P = 0.015, *** P = 0.002).
This decrease occurred along a significantly different curve shape for dark- medium- and light-colored honeys as shown by a highly significant interaction between color and dilution ( p < 0.001).
The methodological quality of the publications shows a positive trend over time, as evidenced by a significant positive correlation between methodological scores and the year of publication (r = 0.45, p = 0.001; see Fig. 3 ), but there is still room for improvement, and future efforts should focus on addressing these limitations. 3.3.
In GEO cohort, the Kaplan-Meier curves were drawn ( Figure 4 A), and a markedly significant difference of p < 0.001 was observed between the groups by median cut-off value (Median cut-off value = 0.37).
Nonverbal Synchrony Nonverbal synchrony was clearly different from pseudosynchrony (coincidence): The comparison with 5,000 pseudodyads was highly significant [ t (382.8) = 9.10; p < 0.001], and this difference had a medium effect size (Cohen's d = 0.67).
A significant trend increase in the annual incidence of RHNF (266 cases/year, p<0.001) and OF (133.9 cases/year, p=0.001) was observed.
Within-subjects effects: The effect of life epoch was highly significant (F(3, 261) = 23886.217, P < 0.001).
Each shift is highly significant ( p < 0.001), underscoring a metabolic drift in pre-cancer lesions toward taxa exploiting inorganic electron acceptors and light ( Figure 7 ). 3.4.
The changes in the 5-factor model scores exhibited a similar trend as the total BPRS score, with highly significant reductions in the score observed on each visit ( P < 0.001) (Table 7 ).
Nonetheless, even with conservative adjustments, the findings would remain statistically significant as all main outcomes were highly significant ( P < .001).
The results suggest a favorable trend in PFS for the patients treated with icotinib+chemotherapy compared to those treated with icotinib alone ( p <0.001, Figure 1A ).
The first canonical axis was highly significant (F = 392.52, p = 0.001), explaining the majority of constrained variation, whereas the second axis was not significant ( p = 0.503).