The main effect of the dose was highly significant ( p < 0.001).
Excerpts
Accounting for variances in PMN counts, the difference between the healthy control and RA subjects remained highly significant in an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) of the nucleosome assay ( P < 0.001).
typus aggregate ( Table 3 ), with the biggest difference shown to be between mean depth at the aggregation sites, 22.2 m, an order of magnitude lower than non-aggregation sites (635.3 m); this difference was highly significant ( t = 19.262, df = 1006.7, p < 0.001).
The results indicated that the composite reliability (CR) of all items or sub-constructs was above 0.7 and highly significant at the p = 0.001 level, and the average variance extracted (AVE) ranged from 0.525 to 0.812, which was highly above the recommended criterion of 0.50.
Both contrasts were highly significant (t = −5.2 and −6.2, p < 0.001).
genus) is a highly significant predictor (F (4,38) = 9.01, p < 0.001) of maxilla shape, accounting for 45.2% of the shape variation.
Statistical analysis revealed a highly significant difference (p<0.001) among the groups using one-way ANOVA with Bonferroni multiple comparison test.
The BT term was found to be highly significant ( p < 0.001) when incorporated into the models for all species except American plaice and golden redfish.
At 50 dB SPL, statistically highly significant (p < .001) improvements of 73% (SoundArc; unilateral) to 81% (softband, bilateral) are found, when compared with the unaided situation.
Key Words: Composite Resins Dental Amalgam Primary Health Care Unified Health System Among bulk materials, there was an increasing trend in Brazil between 2012 (90.3%) and 2014 (97.5%), and after a reduction in 2018 (80.1%) in amalgam for preparation or capsule (p<0.001).
Statistical analysis of this difference is highly significant for both markers using two-way analysis of variance with region as a factor ( P <0.001).
The overall effect of pre-OSS groups was clearly significant ( χ 2 2 = 23.5 ; P < .001) and with no indication of interaction between pre-OSS groups and age groups ( P = .400) or gender groups ( P = .324).
Also, a highly significant association was observed between SPF and ploidy (p<0.001), as 23% of the tumors with SPF, less than 7.5% were aneuploid, compared to 74% of the tumors with higher proliferation rates [ 30 ].
The highly significant association (R = 0.75, P < 0.001) of the scores on assessments 2 weeks apart confirmed test-retest reliability.
An increasing trend in APTT ( p < 0.001) was associated with greater likelihood for transfusion between D1 and D28, as was VAECMO therapy ( p = 0.005) ( Table 4 and Table 5 ).
However, the between-subject effect of CP was now clearly significant, F (1,47) = 18.74, p < 0.001, η p 2 = 0.28.
For the a* value, the Friedman test demonstrated a very highly significant difference among the groups (χ2 = 40.923, df = 2, P < 0.001).
On using post-hoc tests, regarding serum calcium, there were highly significant differences on comparing each group to the other (p<0.001), as was the case with PTH (p<0.001).
For individuals with small IQ differences, we found small to medium relationships that were all highly significant (β = .29 for the IDS-2 FSIQ(7) and German to β = .52 for the RIAS ABIQ(2) and German, all with p < .001), and there were no significant differences in betas between the GICs.
Although these methods had a lot in common in highly significant MTAs, there was a difference between the methods in terms of significant SNPs at the level of − log 10 ( p ) > 3.
The average K was 1.76 for the dyscalculics (range = .68–2.77, SD = .5) and 2.26 for the controls (range = 1.23–3.26, SD = .52), a highly significant difference, t (62) = -3.85, p < .001, d = .96.
The variable was highly significant (Anova, analysis of deviance: df = 16, P < 0.001), and a dispersion factor of 1.004 indicated a good model fit.
A pairwise categorical comparison also revealed highly significant differences between SS and DES (P<0.001) and between SS and controls (P<0.001), but not for DES compared to controls for all three autoantibodies (P = 0.21, 0.32 and 0.10 respectively).
Based on that, 9 out of the identified 14 candidate genes (see Additional file 3 ) passed our criteria, i.e., showed a highly significant (i.e., p < 0.001) association with their gene expression in one or more tumor entities like PER1 and POLD1 (see Additional file 4 ).
The differences are highly significant ( p < 0.001), highlighting the critical role of clinical staging in predicting long‐term survival in NPC patients.