Finally, the modified quadratic model was highly significant ( P < 0.001) to represent the actual relationships between the responses and the significant variables.
← all phrases
“highly significant”
Sighted at
p=0.09
In the literature
californicus was highly significant ( χ 2 = 29.428, df = 3, p < 0.001), and the main effect of rearing strain was also significant ( χ 2 = 9.452, df = 1, p = 0.002).
A highly significant main effect of vocals on arousal was observed, F (1, 96) = 1389.5, p < 0.001, indicating that songs with vocals were rated as more highly arousing than their instrument-only counterparts (Figure 2 ).
We also ran a logistic regression to evaluate if ISI-cal was associated with future CVD events independent of metabolic syndrome, and found that the association between CVD and ISI-cal was highly significant (OR 4.7, 95% CI 2.9–7.4, p <0.001), even when metabolic syndrome was in the model (OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.1–3.1, p = 0.02).
Iron had a highly significant positive interaction with Mn ( r = 0.48) and Zn ( r = 0.40) at p < 0.001 but had a negative correlation with B ( r =-0.36) at p < 0.01.
With a mean point score of 17.5 ± 7.0 (range: 0-32), the painDETECT was in linear regression with the NRS, which was highly significant ( P < 0.001).
The women without a family history had a highly significant difference in posttest scores with the mean of 26.11 questions answered correctly ( t = −21.881; df = 18; P < .001).
As shown in Table 10 , the simple effect of the number of measurements in the experimental group was highly significant ( p < 0.001).
The weighted average effect size was found to be .449 and highly significant ( p < .001).
TP bulk estimates diverged from the TP known values by 1.11 ± 0.18, a highly significant departure ( t = 6.24, df = 25, P < 0.001).
Further filtering identified 18 phosphosites mapping to four distinct genes that exhibited highly significant differences ( p < 0.001) between tumor and non-tumor groups.
A P -value of the 1-way ANOVA test or Kruskal-Wallis test was considered statistically significant at P < 0.05, very significant at P < 0.01, and highly significant at P < 0.001.
A mixed-effects model confirmed a highly significant correlation between the Creatinine ratio relative to baseline Cr and the cIAPe ( P < 0.001), as illustrated in Fig. 4 .
The results revealed highly significant differences in the scores for PF knowledge, exercise enjoyment, and teamwork competencies ( P < 0.001).Additionally,a significant difference was observed in the scores for health-related fitness indicators level scores ( P < 0.05).
persimilis females had a highly significant preference for joining the familiar group (Wilcoxon signed-ranks tests: P ≤ 0.001 for each prey ratio; balanced: N = 30, Z = −3.435; slightly biased to unfamiliar: N = 20, Z = −3.578; slightly biased to familiar: N = 20, Z = −4.025; moderately biased to unfamiliar: N = 20, Z = −3.578; moderately biased to familiar: N = 20, Z = −4.025; strongly biased to unfamiliar: N = 20, Z = −3.628; strongly biased to familiar: N = 20, Z = −4.025; Fig. 2 ).
We crucially found that this interaction was negative and highly significant (β = 3.37, SE = 0.54, z = 6.21, p < 0.001).
These variations were highly significant in the both the PCOS and the control group (p<0.001) ( Table 4 , Fig. 2 ).
A Wilcoxon signed-rank test reveals that the improvement is highly significant ( p < 0.001), indicating that the observed gains are not products of random variance but represent a systematic shift in model capability.
Therefore, based on the correlation analysis results, this research selected the bands highly significant correlated ( p < 0.001, | r | > 0.235) with SSC from the optimal mathematically transformed spectrum ((1/ R )′) and the optimal decomposition scales of wavelet transformations as the feature bands.
The cumulative publication pressure score showed a weaker, but highly significant (inverse) correlation with depersonalisation and personal accomplishment (Pearson’s correlation coefficient 0.29 and −0.15 respectively, p<0.001).
The RT advantage for naming words was slightly smaller when looking only at the first 50 word trials, M 50 WordRT = 447 ms (48), but the difference was still highly significant, t (20) = 3.75, p = 0.001.
This analysis confirms the previous results: The value-based model fits better than the association-based model both for error rates (median R 2 values are.34 and.21, respectively, and the difference is highly significant, T = 0, p <.001, tested with paired Wilcoxon test, where R 2 values are handled as ordinal variables) and for reaction times (median R 2 values are.53 and.39, T = 0, p <.001).
The total effect of Reciprocity on Intention was highly significant ( β = .35, p < .001), demonstrating that Reciprocity exerts both direct and indirect influences.
To test this hypothesis, we searched for common motifs in 100 bp windows surrounding the identified MVPs in CS, LGG and CC using the multiple expectation maximization for motif elicitation (MEME) 17 suite and identified the 5′-CDGGRA-3′ motif as highly significant (MEME P -value=10 −3 , discriminative DNA motif discovery (DREME) P -value=7 × 10 −70 ).
Hence, the serum zinc concentration in cases is lower than the concentration in controls and it is statistically highly significant ( P < 0.001).