“highly significant”

This difference was highly significant when applying the unpaired t-test (p < 0.001) (Table 4 ).

In particular, the two leaf physiological traits called intercellular CO 2 concentration and Transpiration rate depicted highly significant differences (p<0.001).

The comparisons between the scores at the different VAS and the LLS score revealed highly significant correlations (p < .001) for six out of seven items (Table 2 ).

In (4) the effect of self-obese on 6 cat_requests is negative and highly significant ( p value < 0.001).

11 ) showed that 3D CT was more reliable than frontal cephalometry for 11 points, Or (R), Or (L), ANS, UM (L), LM (L), Me (p < 0.001, very highly significant), MO (L), NC (L), Ag (L) (p < 0.01, highly significant), UM (R) and Ag (R) (p < 0.05, significant).

In case of patients with intense tooth staining, 32.7% of dentists would indicate tooth whitening, while only 4.9% of dentists would indicate tooth whitening when stains were not intense; which determined a highly significant association between these variables ( p =0.001).

These differences were highly significant between the groups ( P <0.001).

A well-known cardioprotective agent was used as a positive control (bradykinin 100 nM), resulting in a highly significant IS reduction (16.6 ± 2.3, P = 0.001).

The difference between the baseline and 12 months postoperative values was also highly significant with P <0.001 ( Table 2 ).

A highly significant ( p ≤ 0.001) positive correlation (R 2 = 0.97, 0.95, 0.93) was observed between EC and the nutrient parameters K, P, and N.

Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity was highly significant ( p < 0.001), indicating patterned relationships between the variables, making PCA a suitable analysis [ 37 ].

Model comparison demonstrated that the RCS model provided a superior fit to the data compared to the linear Cox specification ( Supplementary Table S5 ), as evidenced by a highly significant likelihood ratio test ( P < 0.001) and lower Akaike and Bayesian information criteria (ΔAIC and ΔBIC both < 0).

This difference was highly significant (corrected p -value < 0.001) in 15 of 17 patients (88%) for both cumulants and less significant (corrected p -value < 0.01) in the other 2 patients.

Genome-wide differentially DNA methylation genes profiling in PCOS Genome-wide DNA methylation analysis showed 6936 differentially methylated CpG sites (p<0.005) respectively between control and PCOS-obesity group and 2664 CpG sites exhibited highly significant (P<0.001, Supplementary Dataset 1A ).

The (fixed effects) Cochran–Mantel–Haenszel approach 5 revealed a highly significant ( p < 0.001) mortality difference, with a risk ratio of 5.34 (95% confidence intervals 4.84–5.90) in COVID-positive ACS patients.

When the groups separated according to the presence of osteoporosis were compared among themselves ( n 1 = 72, n 2 = 66, n 3 = 18) according to the degree of DI, it was found to be statistically highly significant, similar to the SI grade results (normal–osteopenia, osteopenia–osteoporosis, and normal–osteoporosis, all three p < 0.001).

The correlation between the presence of the cTnT dp2 band and ADD is highly significant (Spearman’s ρ = 0.552, p ≤ 0.001).

Results were evaluated for statistical significance by ANOVA using a two-tailed Tukey-Kramer approach for multiple comparisons (highly significant ***p < 0.001; very significant **p < 0.01; significant *p < 0.05; not significant ns, p > 0.05).

8 There was also a highly significant increase in the level of pHH3 ( P <0.001), from a MMI of -3.14 in presentation ALL cells to 62.48 in MRD cells. pCREB levels increased from 26.70 to 69.85 ( P <0.01).

The differences between WT and KO mice are highly significant ( p < 0.001) at both 16 and 22.6 kHz.

As demonstrated by a highly significant coefficient of −4.29 ( p < 0.001), animals from Faisalabad also had a much‐reduced likelihood of testing positively.

Subsequent application of robust variance estimation (RVE) showed that after CR2 small-sample correction, the pooled effect size remained highly significant (g = 0.92, 95% CI [0.61, 1.24], p < 0.001).

A highly significant increase in similarity was found between the pre- and post-assistance blocks (p < 10 − 3 ), with average values rising from 0.71 to 0.61 (pre-assistance) to 0.79 and 0.76 (post-assistance).

The analysis revealed a strong response in the cells to MYO1C over-expression in form of a highly significant ( P < 0.001) decrease in the number of live cells starting at 48 hours post transfection and throughout the experiment time span ( Fig 3D ).

Compared to the positive control group (i.e., treatment with BDNF; 65.38 ± 28.40 cells per well), a highly significant increase of survival was obtained ( p < 0.001).