“highly significant”

The analysis of molecular variance (AMOVA) showed that total variation was highly significant ( p < 0.001) within individuals i.e. 63.17% (Table 6 ).

The pattern of isolation by distance (IBD) became highly significant after the heatwave (Mantel tests Z = 691.70, r = 0.92, P < 0.001) but was not significant before (Mantel tests Z = 500.99, r = 0.40, P = 0.17).

In general, a highly significant change in HR from baseline after cutting of the spermatic cord was discovered in groups P (p < 0.001), L (p = 0.002), B (p < 0.001) and M (p < 0.001) compared to that in group NaCl.

The decrease of YYY and YYD was highly significant between 2002–2003 and 2017 (p<0.001).

After adjusting for demographic and fundamental clinical factors (Model 1: age, sex, surgical history, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and oncologic disease), the association remained highly significant (OR = 30.36, 95% CI: 20.82–44.26, p < 0.001).

The obese PCOS women were significantly more frequent in the <18 and >20 CAG repeat category than the lean PCOS women, yielding a highly significant odds (p = 0.001).

Correlations Between the Clinical Judgment on Each of the Three Dimensions of SA and the Score on the Corresponding Subscale of the SAMAS Results of Pearson’s r correlation analyses show a highly significant positive correlation between the declarative score obtained on the SAMAS and the clinical judgment of declarative SA ( r = 0.67; p < 0.001) as well as between score for the anticipatory items of the SAMAS and the clinical judgment of anticipatory SA ( r = 0.62; p < 0.001).

In OFT, reduced locomotor activity/exploratory behavior was evidenced by a highly significant decrease in the number of rearings ( p < 0.001; Figure 7B ), line crossings ( p < 0.001; Figure 7A ), and time spent in inner squares ( p < 0.01; Figure 7C ) in the infected group as compared to the control group.

Thus, R-Wt-4 and R-SSI-4 displayed a highly significant difference regarding mutation types in their mutant spectra (χ 2 = 13.3, P<0.001).

Differences were considered significant if p < 0.05 and highly significant if p < 0.001.

* P < 0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance, ** P < 0.01 was considered highly significant, *** P < 0.001 was considered extremely significant and ns indicates not significant.

Among those older infants that were stratified as HR, only 66.9% had an LP performed which is highly significant compared with the infants less than 30d old (p<0.001).

The proportion difference was highly significant (p<0.001) as depicted in Figure 3 .

All the agreements were found to be highly significant ( P < 0.001) [ Figures 1 - 4 ].

A highly significant effect of event category was found (F(3,38) = 17.84; P < 0.001).

The effect of growth class was highly significant (p<0.001) in the statistical model applied.

The difference in prevalence among the seasons was highly significant (p<0.001) ( Table-2 ).

The epistatic loci were classified into two highly significant (P < 0.001), nine significant (P < 0.01) and six suggestive (P < 0.05) QTL relationships (Table 2 ).

The difference of the Flexo group was statistically highly significant with all the other groups (p < 0.001).

After accounting for senior rating for cases of disagreement between rater 1 and rater 2, the results remained highly significant (10 vs 39 ; P<0.001).

62 There was a highly significant improvement in the YMRS 107 (−19.0, P < 0.001) and overall response rate (defined as ≥30% reduction in YMRS and CGI-Severity score of mild or less severe) was 61%.

The regression model was highly significant, χ 2 (4) = 22.61, p < 0.001, correctly classifying 90% of participants as completers or dropouts.

It is noteworthy, however, that the correlation is highly significant (KTCC = 0.68, p-value<0.001, N = 21) if we exclude the four epitopes for which we have least confidence in our inferred rates ( Figure S1 ).

Furthermore, highly significant positive correlations were found between VLDLR II and β-catenin in gastric cancer ( r = 0.689; P < 0.001)breast cancer ( r = 0.594; P < 0.001).

Women with a family history of panic attacks were over three times more likely to experience such episodes with a highly significant P value ( P < 0.001), indicating a strong familial link to panic attacks [ Tables 5 and 6 ].