“highly significant”

The correlation was highly significant ( p < 0.001) using Pearson correlation coefficient.

Hence, the features of 9–20 except feature-12 and feature-19 show the highly significant different ( p -value < 0.001) in the SISA dataset.

Differences are considered statistically significant for P values <0.05 and highly significant for P values <0.001.

Results At the end of treatment (EOT), there was a highly significant increase in platelet count ( p < 0.001), a significant increase in white blood cells (WBCs) count ( p ≤ 0.032), and a highly significant decrease in hemoglobin level ( p < 0.001) as compared to pretreatment levels.

The model demonstrated a highly significant association of both past (B = -1.286; P = <0.0001) and current non-vegetarian food habit (B = -0.667; P = 0.001) in the advancement of AMD pathology ( Table 6 ).

Moreover, the synthetic and real IHC positivity, measured using QuPath algorithms, showed a highly significant concordance (R 2 = 0.56, P < .001).

The correlation is highly significant ( p -value = 0.001), Table S1: The individual PET scanning characteristics are listed for all 18 enrolled patients in the study.

Results Exploratory Factor Analysis The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy was 0.91 for the complete data, and Bartlett test of sphericity was highly significant ( P <.001).

Furthermore, the miR-26a mimic-transfected follicles showed highly significant upregulation of the expression of mmu-mir-26a as compared to the miR- non-targeted control group ( p < 0.001).

Statistical analysis using the χ 2 test revealed a highly significant result ( p <0.001), indicating that the observed changes in severity scores from week 0 to week 4 were not due to chance.

Analysis of variance showed that malting barley grown after non-malting barley crops gave very highly significant ( p < 0.001) grain and biomass yield increments than when malting barley was the preceding crop in these experimental sites (Tables 1 and 2 ).

In Exp3, no significant difference was found between the 2 groups (“out of hand” and “out of box”) (ANOVA: F (1, 14) = 0.446 and p > 0.05) while the effect of “trials” was highly significant (ANOVA: F (38, 532) = 24.105 and p < 0.001).

In the case of TUG, the association was highly significant, maintaining a P ‐value <0.001 after adjustment for all confounders (Model 6: β = − 0.092; R 2 = 0.390; −0.137 to −0.048; P ≤ 0.001).

There was a highly significant interaction between Task and Region for both sets of ROIs, P < 0.001.

Experiment (1) revealed no negative impact by HEDP on available chlorine (1), while all three experiments showed a highly significant ( p > 0.001) synergistic effect, which was not hampered by HEDP, between NaOCl and ultrasonic activation regarding tissue weight loss (1, 3) and dissolution of gelatin (2).

Differences were considered statistically significant with p < 0.05 (*), highly significant with p < 0.01 (**) and extremely significant with p < 0.001 (***). 2.8.

Despite a non-significant effect of treatment, the interaction between the Line × Treatment was highly significant ( F (1,178) = 20.96; p < 0.001), meaning that the effect of NLX administration on ethanol intake was more prominent in HA mice.

A positive, statistically highly significant correlation was found between the BMCS barrier subscale and MLHFQ subscale and total scores (p<0.001; Table 5 ).

baumannii -infected mice treated with AMX (10 mg/kg) exhibited a 100% survival rate on day 30 post-infection ( Figure 8 C), which is highly significant as compared to the saline-treated mice ( p < 0.001).

The results show highly significant group differences as well as high effect sizes (Cohen’s d) in all four indicator variables of acceptance ( Suitability ( t (58) = −3.64, p = 0.001, d = 0.94), Convenience (t (57) = −4.52, p < 0.001, d = 1.18), Ease of use (t (58) = −5.10, p < 0.001, d = 1.32), Preference (t (58) = −5.33, p = < 0.001, d = 1.38), as well as for Overall Acceptance (t (58) = −5.89, p < 0.001, d = 1.52).

Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test showed that this difference was highly significant ( p < 0.001).

The 2-cluster solution was differently distributed over the 5 variables and according to the type of diagnoses (ICD-10; Table 1 ), and it was highly significant ( P< .001).

Compared with the PBS control group, the low-dose group showed significant neutralizing antibody potency after prime immunization ( p < 0.01), and both the high-dose group after prime immunization and the low and high-dose groups after booster immunization showed highly significant neutralizing antibody potency ( p < 0.001).

The variation between caries-free and caries group pertaining to tasters and nontasters was found to be statistically highly significant ( p < 0.001) and without any gender variation (data not shown).

From this study, we observed that the cognitive learning outcome measured with the pretest and posttest scores, students performed better in Group B (39.53%) than Group A (18.43%), and the difference was statistically highly significant ( P < 0.001***) [ Table 1 and and Figure 1 ].