“highly significant”

Statistically highly significant ( P < 0.001) results had been seen in weekly interval.

The obtained results were interpreted as, insignificant P > 0.05, significant P < 0.01, highly significant P < 0.001 Observations Out of 60 patients, the maximum (37%) belonged to age between 45 to 55 years. 50% and 60% patients were male in group A and B respectively.

The coefficient for Aging_Rate ( β3 ) is positive and highly significant (1.094, p = 0.001), confirming Hypothesis 3 ( β3 > 0).

The model fitness was assessed using the Prob>χ 2 test, which indicated a highly significant result (p<0.001) for all three models, suggesting that the models fit the data well.

Relationship of plasma L and Z to core study variables In the general linear model with putative core explanatory variables (age, sex, MP, education level, BMI, smoking status and family history of AMD), these variables were significantly related to plasma L after controlling for the other variables, with highly significant relationships (p<0.001) for sex, BMI, education level, family history of AMD, MP, and smoking status.

In these two cases, the variation in transmission bias is supported by highly significant heterogeneity G -tests (multilocus genotype 45: G = 32.750, P <0.001; multilocus genotype 58: G = 27.534, P = 0.001).

All eggs exhibited a change in odour composition between day 1 and day 8 (fertile eggs: δ 1 2 = 0.79, P < 0.001; infertile eggs: δ 1 2 = 0.85, P < 0.001); however, while there was no significant difference in volatile composition between fertile and infertile eggs on day 1 (δ 1 2 = 0.15, P = 0.738), by day 8 the difference was highly significant (δ 1 2 = 0.86, P < 0.001) ( Fig. 1 ).

Incubation with the substrate led to a larger drop in caecal reaction than incubation of control samples for both species, as demonstrated by highly significant differences ( P <0.001; Table 2 ).

Since the effect of TL was always highly significant (p < 0.001), though, such caveat should be less likely to influence the interpretation of this variable.

Patients with a positive AC-3 IIF (1/80) titer were found to have a 15.89 times higher likelihood of SARD positivity compared to those with negative titers, and this relationship was highly significant ( p < 0.001).

The statistical analysis identified a significant difference of microleakage among the groups, with Group II as having significantly lower leakage in comparison to Group I (p = 0.04) and Group III had the best outcome with highly significant difference from Group I (p = 0.001).

For patients aged below 81 years, the adjusted ICU mortality rate was 13.5%, while for those aged 81 years and above, the rate was 19.8%, with a highly significant difference (p < 0.001).

Moreover, silymarin (group V) pretreatment produced highly significant decrease ( P < 0.001) in serum SGOT, SGPT, GGT, ALP total bilirubin, and LDH.

Gal‐3 was positively correlated with phagocytic NADPH oxidase‐dependent superoxide production ( r =0.476; P <0.001; Figure 6 A), which remained highly significant after controlling for age and sex ( r =0.450; P <0.001; Table 3 ).

1 ) was highly significant (n = 204, r 2 = 0.951, p<0.001), the pattern and strength of relationship persisting when we controlled for phylogeny using two other family arrangements (99<n<134, 0.790< r 2 < 0.906, 493.46<F<969.27, p<0.001; Table S2).

However, with the duration of deprivation extending to 24 h, the amplitude of the P2 component exhibited a highly significant reduction compared to baseline levels ( p < 0.001), indicating a substantial impact of prolonged sleep loss on early stages of information processing in the brain.

While 100% relief in pain (highly significant [P < 0.001**]) was observed in group-II.

At 5000 ppm, L-PDRN’s activity was 20.41% (±1.07), more than double that of PDRN’s 9.42% (±0.80), with a highly significant difference ( p < 0.001).

The mean reduction in office blood pressure was 14.1 mm Hg with active therapy and 11.7 mm Hg with placebo at 6 months, and was highly significant for both groups compared to baseline ( P <0.001), but the between-group difference was small (2.4 mm Hg) and not significant ( P =0.26).

Preliminary tests confirmed the data’s suitability for dimensional analysis, with a Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) measure of 0.91 indicating excellent sampling adequacy and Bartlett’s test of sphericity yielding a highly significant result (χ 2 = 2181.50, p < 0.001), confirming sufficient inter-item correlations.

Both FHR and MHR showed highly significant delta % changes in the OM group ( P < 0.001).

As expected, a model including Activity ratings ( Table 2 , alternative model) did not yield a close fit between sampled data and the estimated model as shown by a highly significant chi-square ( p < 0.001) and CFI < 0.96.

The analysis showed a highly significant zonal difference in glomerular size (p < 0.001) on both kidneys.

La max also demonstrated a highly significant positive correlation with mean power output (r = 0.74, p < 0.001).

For emotional, sexual, physical, and any IPV, the likelihood ratio χ2 statistics showed a marked increase and remained highly significant ( p < 0.001).