“highly significant”

When the beam breaks were divided into 5 min bins, the activity levels showed a highly significant reduction across the 20 min session (F(3, 36) = 11.4, p < 0.001), with no effect of surgery (F < 1) and no interaction between these factors (F < 1).

Regarding perceptions of job-related career development factors, a highly significant relationship was found with age ( p < 0.001), education level ( p < 0.001), and academic position ( p < 0.001), while years of experience also showed a statistically significant association ( p = 0.010).

The parameter estimates for the model using DBH and H together as predictors (M2) were highly significant ( p < 0.001), with acceptable PRSE values (PRSE < 25%) for each species.

The highly significant fixed intercept indicates that participants kept a comfortable distance to the robot, coeff = 83.03, SE = 5.56, p < .001, 95% CI = [71.77, 94.29].

Overall, there was a strong, highly significant relationship between overall scores in 2012 and 2016 ( Fig 5A ; linear regression model, p < 0.001, R 2 = 0.79).

Highly significant dose reductions (p<0.001) were also found for relevant organs of interest adjacent to the scan field (brain -84%, eye lenses -90%) as well as in the direct beam (red bone marrow -20%, salivary glands -84%).

The differences between the two groups were highly significant for all comparisons ( P < 0.001), except for the comparison of the PCT concentrations in bacterial and viral infections with a likely diagnosis based on objective findings.

CO Emissions: Highly significant reduction with CNG (F = 45.63, p < 0.001).

Independently from the fixation technique, the defect size was a main factor that influenced the union time as there was a highly significant correlation between defect size and union-time ( p < 0.001, R 2 = 0.35).

Intergroup differences were hierarchically interpreted as follows: p < 0.05, significant; p < 0.01, highly significant; p < 0.001, extremely significant. 3.

There is a statistically highly significant increase in total leucocytic count (TLC) and BM blasts ( p < 0.001).

OHIP-14 scores demonstrated a highly significant reduction from baseline to post-intervention assessment (p < 0.001), indicating marked improvement in OHRQoL across all participants.

The p overall and p trend for the RS mutations were both highly significant (p<0.001) demonstrating a clear mutagenic effect, with the exception of the lowest dose tested (0.25 Gy) where no RS mutations were observed.

The DMN activation has been found highly significant on cluster level [ p < 0.001, family-wise error (FWE) corrected for multiple comparisons].

In contrast, sampling time exerted a highly significant effect on estrogen concentration (p < 0.001), reflecting marked temporal fluctuations throughout the estrous cycle ( Table 11 ).

We did observe a highly significant effect of cognitive load on reaction time (RT) in the visual task [ F (2.73, 35.44) = 29.24, p < 0.001, η 2 = 0.69] showing that visual target RT increased as a function of cognitive load.

Additionally, frozen-thawed sperm exhibited a significant reduction in motility compared to fresh sperm, with a highly significant difference between the two groups (p < 0.001) ( Figure 1A ).

The Shannon–Weaver diversity index was very variable between samples and ranged from 0.93 to 5.07; the different sponges showed highly significant differences (ANOVA F 13, 14 = 7.03, p < 0.001; partial-η 2 = 0.87; 1-β = 0.999) (Fig. 3A ), whereas no additional factor significantly affected the alpha–diversity of the sponge microbiome ( p > 0.1).

For relative conductivity, both G, W and their interaction were highly significant ( p < 0.001) ( Table 2 ).

Both main effects and their interaction were highly significant ( p < 0.001), jointly explaining 96.7% of the variance in mechanical force.

There was a highly significant ( P <0.001) difference between the participation rates in the PEARL practices and that expected from the non-PEARL, with 6914 (54%) participation vs 6543 (51%) expected.

The change was highly significant ( p = 0.001).

The Kruskal–Wallis test demonstrated highly significant variation in mean daily volumes of total calls, accepted calls, and ambulance dispatches (Table 4 ; all p < 0.001).

Post hoc analyses confirmed a highly significant effect of both block (F(5, 355) = 105.79, p < 0.001) and discrimination (F(1, 71) = 54.01, p < 0.001), with lower overall accuracy in the incongruent condition than in the standard condition.

As expected, GLS values differed markedly between the two groups, with a highly significant difference ( p < 0.001; Table 1 ).