“highly significant”

The trend over AUC adj was highly significant ( P < 0.001).

2 ) leading to a highly significant overall decrease in bleeding intensity from 6±2 to 2±2 postoperatively (P<0.001).

P ‐value was considered significant (* P < 0.05), very significant (** P < 0.01) or highly significant (*** P < 0.001).

Results show highly significant (p<0.001) reduction of the frequency of bowl-movements (77.4±4.2%) and blood presence in stool (90.3±0.8%).

Furthermore, we found a highly significant and moderate correlation between the two aspects “enough support during decision-making” and “satisfaction with the decision” (Fisher’s exact test, p = 0.001, n = 22; Cramer’s V = 0.683).

A higher Student's t -value corresponds to a lower p -value, indicating a highly significant coefficient. 67 According to Table 7 , the effects of the three parameters on the adsorption yield of BB41 were found to be significant ( P < 0.001) for both adsorbents. 63,64 It is followed, to a lesser extent, by second-order interaction effects.

The two discriminating functions for this model were highly significant (P<0.001).

The RCT final results showed a highly significant difference in the incremental DMFT score in favour of the intervention group (two-year mean difference: 0.8; p < 0.001, three-year mean difference: 0.9; p < 0.001) [ 3 ].

3 c shows a highly significant correlation (R 2 = 0.96; p < 0.001) between the NVC metrics determined by the two methods.

The comparison between baseline visit and the last visit D4M, 4 months after the last IPL session, in group <40 years, the difference was highly significant, p < 0.001, the group between 40 and 60 years, the degree of significance was lower, p < 0.005 and in the group of more than 60 years, the difference was minimally significant, p < 0.01.

Interestingly, the results showed that the relationship between mobile phone distraction and cognitive emotional pre-occupation is highly significant when attention control is low (β = 0.44, p < 0.001) but becomes weakest and insignificant when attention control is high (β = 0.05, p > 0.05).

Data was considered statistically significant if the p value is < to 0.05 and highly significant at p < 0.001.

These differences between stem‐level herbivory incidence were highly significant (Kruskal–Wallis χ 2 = 1,636.4, df = 2, p ≤ .001).

A comparison between ( n loci = 2; s = 0.69) and ( n loci = 1; s = 0.19) shows that the two-locus model as null hypothesis is non-significant ( P = 0.27), whereas it is highly significant as an alternative model ( P < 0.001) ( Fig.

This difference was highly significant (T = 6.847, df = 108, p < .001).

Predictor for doctors prescribing medicinal cannabis While age emerged as a weak yet statistically significant predictor of prescription attitude (β = 0.22, p < 0.05), the strongest predictor was attitude towards the clinical use of medicinal cannabis, which demonstrated a robust and highly significant positive relationship with prescription attitude (β = 0.71, p < 0.001) (Table 4 ).

The results revealed highly significant differences in CAI values ( p < 0.001) (Fig. 6 A), N C values ( p < 0.001) (Fig. 6 B), and ω ratios ( p < 0.001) (Fig. 6 C) between ancestral and extant sequences, suggesting distinct evolutionary dynamics in codon usage and selective pressures between the two groups.

The findings were highly significant ( P < 0.001).

Quantitative assessment of CA1 hippocampal injury using an unbiased scoring system 11 12 ( Figure 2G ) indicated that the difference between B6 and SJL mice is highly significant (H(2,37) = 27.785, P<0.001 by Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA on ranks; Dunn's pairwise comparison: B6 vs SJL, P<0.05; B6 vs B6xSJL F1, P<0.05; SJL vs B6xSJL F1, P>0.05).

Fast networks significantly differed from slow networks in all categories ( Fig 4c ), with the differences being highly significant for the case of mixed-selective neurons (more common in fast networks, p < 0.001) and silent neurons (more common in slow networks, p < 0.001).

3 The four dummy variables for seniority level were all highly significant ( p < 0.001).

Highly significant ( p < 0.001) analgesic activity with less writhing count was seen in the standard group (19.60 ± 0.95) followed by the LF group (20.26 ± 0.98) and group VI experimental (25.35 ± 1.55) animals.

melanogaster genotype was a highly significant predictor of ovariole number (Levene’s test, F 13, 266 = 2.7702, p = 0.001).

The overall F st value of 0.059 suggested moderate but highly significant ( P < 0.001) differentiation between subgroups.

Comparison of the transcript abundance between promoter-methylated and promoter-unmethylated genes revealed a highly significant negative correlation ( p < 0.001) between gene expression levels and promoter methylation levels, especially in the CG and CHG contexts ( Fig 4B ).