“highly significant”

Hence, treatment with VSV-GP provided a highly significant survival benefit ( P < 0.001, log-rank test).

In contrast, the ANCOVA investigating depressive mood as IV, as presented in Figure 1 , showed that the effect for DASS Depressive mood was highly significant (normal mood < 5, high depressive mood ≥ 5; F1,78 = 12.8, p < 0.001), and so the group x depressive mood interaction for CFQ scores as a function of normal versus high depressive mood (F1,78 = 4.82, p < 0.05).

The correlation among the mean δ 15 N signatures of these primary consumers and the remaining members of the communities was highly significant (p< 0.001, adjusted R 2 = 0.73) ( Fig 6 ).

According to Table 3 , farm size exhibits a highly significant positive correlation with information usage (p = 0.001), suggesting that larger farm sizes enable more intensive information application.

In total, the percentage of overlap of recapture stretches with those of other individuals of the same sex was 14.4% while the overlap with individuals of the other sex was 59.2%, a difference that was highly significant ( W = 6482.5, p < 0.001).

A highly significant positive correlation ( P ≤ 0.001) between spike compactness and FHB was also evident in all the three environments.

The ANOVA output of the ABCD test versions indicated highly significant differences between the subjects ( p <0.001, CI = 0.160, 0.244), almost significant differences between the age groups ( p = 0.052, CI = 0.002, 0.235), and no significant differences between the parallel test versions ( p = 0.120, CI A − B = -0.013, 0.078, CI A − C = -0.061, 0.029, CI A − D = -0.017, 0.073).

After adjusting for age, lung cancer status remained a highly significant independent predictor of D50 (β = −0.01724, p < 0.001, Table S5 ).

There was a highly significant main effect of Picture Category ( F (2, 30) = 99.0, p < .001, η p 2 = .868) which was also accompanied by non‐significant effects for Time ( F (1, 15) = 3.38, p = .086, η p 2 = .184) and Time by Picture Category ( F (2, 30) = 0.34, p = .712, η p 2 = .022).

Freidman's repeated measures analysis of variance was applied to compare change in all indicators in both Group A and B, all of which turned out to be highly significant (all P<0.001).

Pairwise comparisons indicated that these differences were all highly significant (all p ≤ .001).

This effect was highly significant (based on the reduced sample of N = 507 with N = 471 unimpaired and N = 36 impaired at V1; Chi 2 [1] = 67.3, p < 0.001).

Results Effect of therapy on chief complaints Group A depicted highly significant ( P < 0.001) results in Aayasa , Glani , Daurbalya , Shoka , and Nidra and significant ( P < 0.05) results in Dhamani Jala Darshana , Kapolgatavasa , and Sthula Parva [ Table 1 ].

For Miridae, treatment effects were highly significant in 2021 (F = 1871.29, p < 0.001) and remained significant in 2022 (F = 53.52, p = 0.0013).

A highly significant association between gender and CRP score was found with p-value < 0.001.

All comparisons yielded highly significant differences (all p < .001), with effect sizes gradually decreasing from the elite to the lower performance percentiles.

All four factors passed the highly significant test (p < 0.001) and constitute the core drivers of spatial differentiation in villages.

In this report, we observed a highly significant difference in N-HK concentration values ( p <0.001) between healthy women taking OP contraception and those without this hormonal treatment.

These differences were statistically highly significant ( P < 0.001) [ Table 3 ].

In the statistical analyses, differences were classed as significant (*) for values of P < 0.05, more significant (**) for values of P < 0.01, and highly significant (***) for values of P < 0.001.

The increasing trend was highly significant ( p < 0.001).

Furthermore when the third factor continuous light was included, the interaction between all three factors was highly significant for normalization with the selection of reference genes (p<0.001), ACT2 alone (p<0.05), but not significant when normalizing with EF1α alone ( S4 Table ).

Both FHR and MHR showed highly significant delta % changes in the OM group ( P < 0.001).

For the final 24-item-model, all factor loadings were found to be highly significant (p < 0.001) and acceptable, excepted for KNO_HM3 (0.393) and KNO_KB2a (0.404; see Fig. 1 ).

A two-way ANOVA test (Single/Double cue conditions and location) revealed that the interaction between location and cue condition was highly significant (F(7, 105) = 4.72 p < 0.001) and that the main effect of cue condition was significant (F(7, 105) = 16.74, p < 0.001).