“highly significant”

The results revealed a highly significant difference in genome size between cultivated and wild jujube (U = 22494.0, p < 0.001), with the median genome size of cultivated jujube (3.49 × 10 8 ) being significantly larger than that of wild jujube (3.37 × 10 8 ), and the Common Language Effect Size (CL = 0.355) confirming the practical relevance of this difference.

Pairwise comparisons of symptom change between timepoints Both depressive (HDRS) and anxiety (HAM-A) symptoms showed highly significant reductions from T1 to T2 ( p < 0.001) and continued to decrease significantly from T2 to T3 ( p < 0.001).

Table 2 includes the perceptions of the nursing on managerial items, including three regarding the “Frequency of events reported.” The overall perceptions were highly significant after accreditation in comparison with the international benchmarks for all items ( P <.001).

The ANOVA analysis revealed highly significant effects for time (F = 9.307, p < 0.001) and for the time × group interaction term (F = 42.36, p < 0.001), indicating that although the SNOT-22 questionnaire score decreases spontaneously over time, the treated group shows a markedly greater and significantly larger reduction compared with the control group.

A highly significant difference concerning the distribution of the 2 major resistance mechanisms among FQ and aminoglycoside resistant isolates was detected ( P = 0.001 and 0.0001 respectively).

The significance level was defined as follows: p ≥ 0.05 not significant, p < 0.05 significant, p < 0.01 highly significant and p < 0.001 most highly significant.

The significance levels from three-way ANOVA of algal species, treatment and season across the study were highly significant ( P < 0.001) for all interactions as well as all main effects (Table 2 ) showing that the effect of treatment varied significantly between the algal species and that this was further modified by the time of year the seaweeds were collected.

The total indirect effects were highly significant for both working memory (B = 0.14, p < 0.001) and attention (B = 0.12, p = 0.003).

Motor recovery, evaluated using the Brunnstrom stages, demonstrated highly significant progress in the upper limb (median: 2–4, p < 0.001), hand (median: 2–3, p = 0.002), and lower limb (median: 3–4, p < 0.001).

In order to answer this question, PERMANOVA was performed, the results of which indicated that the combined effect of all analyzed variables (elements concentration in soil, characteristics of soil, mushroom species) explained almost 80% of the variability of the elemental profile (R 2 = 0.79949) and was highly significant (F = 18.412, p = 0.001) (Table 6 ).

For the total number of request strategies used in a single dialogue, the overall between-group difference was statistically highly significant ( p < 0.001, eta2 = 0.2598, large effect).

A two-way ANOVA revealed main effects of Counter (F(2, 5013) = 68.32, p < 0.001) and Block (F(5, 5013) =19.47, p < 0.001), as well as a highly significant Counter × Block interaction (F(10, 5013) = 23.66, p < 0.001).

The list of 43 highly significant ( P < 0.001) gene sets was used as input data for GeneNetwork v2.

3 , there is a highly significant association of grass pollen concentration and the index physical symptoms ( β = 0.002; p < 0.001).

* indicates significant differences (p < 0.05), ** indicates very significant differences (p < 0.01) and *** indicates highly significant differences (p < 0.001).

Bartlett's Test of Sphericity is highly significant (χ 2 = 277.646, p < 0.001), confirming that the variables in the study are sufficiently correlated to be grouped into factors.

As expected, cue presented had a highly significant effect on response (LRT = 4958.2, p < 0.001); ‘stay’ responses being highest for the positive tone, lowest for the negative tone and intermediate for the ambiguous tone (Fig. 3 ).

A highly significant (***p ≤ 0.001) decrease of DOCK8 expression to 63% (±28.5% standard deviation (SD)) in ERU compared to healthy controls (100% ± 38.3% SD) was detected by western blot (Fig. 3A,B ).

• Estrogenic and Anti-Estrogenic study shows the highly significant value show increase in the uterine weight (410.67 ± 09.09 a ) mg/100 g b.wt.) and uterine contents was observed in estrogen treated group (P < 0.001) ( Table 6 ).

When analyzed separately in univariable logistic regression models, maximum PaCO 2 as well as lowest pH showed highly significant associations with poor neurological outcome (OR 1.17, 95% CI 1.06–1.28; P < 0.001 and 0.03, 95% CI 0.01–0.09; P < 0.001, respectively).

For IC, passive control groups showed a moderate beneficial effect (SMD = 0.53, 95% CI [0.33, 0.73]), while active control groups were associated with a significant negative effect (SMD = −0.69, 95% CI [−1.02, −0.36]), resulting in a highly significant subgroup difference ( p < 0.001).

We computed a 3 × 2 repeated-measures ANOVA with factors ROUND(third-to-last, second-to-last, last) and AHA(aha, no aha) to compare mean FoW ratings, and found a highly significant main effect for ROUND [ F (2,52) = 132.27, p < 0.001, ε G-G =0.845, η p 2 =0.836, power G-G =1.0], no main effect of AHA [ F (1,26) = 1.05, p = 0.315, η p 2 = 0.039, power = 0.167], and a highly significant interaction [ F (2,52) = 15.63, p < 0.001, ε G-G =0.642, η p 2 =0.375, power G-G =0.988].

Behavioral EI had a highly significant relationship (β = 0.64, p < 0.001, n = 100) with perceived leadership effectiveness and no relationship with engagement ( Miller, 2014 ).

The chi-squared test for heterogeneity was highly significant (I 2 = 78.1%, P < 0.001).

Furthermore, compound 24 caused highly significant ( p -value < 0.001) down-regulation of the gene expressions of ORF1a / b , ACE-2 , and RdRp with fold-changes of 2.05, 0.58, and 1.4, respectively (Fig. 4 A–E) as compared to the drug control RDV.