“highly significant”

These significant transcripts included 54 gene isoforms showing a highly significant Bonferroni-corrected p-value (p < 0.001).

At 20 μg MSC-EVs, proliferation increased 1.5-fold (p < 0.05), and highly significant changes (p < 0.001) were observed at 40 to 100 μg compared to the untreated control (Fig. 3A ).

After taking the repeated nature of the data into account, the adjusted mean difference remained highly significant (mean difference 0.667, P <.001) but with a smaller effect size at 0.33 (see Table 3 ).

When serum levels of Vitamin C were compared between Group I (1.379 mg/dl) and Group II (1.1 mg/dl), the difference was statistically highly significant ( P < 0.001).

F5 cells exhibited decreased fold-upregulation of Wnt activity compared to HCT-116 cells, and the greater than two-fold difference in Wnt signaling upregulation between these lines was highly significant ( P < 0.001) (Fig. 1 C).

However, while we did find a significant correlation between WASI II scores and age in Study 1 (r = .28, p = .035) our LoL data showed no correlation between expertise and age and a partial correlation of expertise with WASI II accounting for age was still highly significant ( p = .001, r = .45).

Furthermore, we observed a large and highly significant main effect of “ instruction ” ( F (2,80) = 66.78, p < 0.001, η p 2 = 0.63). “ Instruction ” did not interact with “ sex ” ( F (2,80) = 1.65, p = 0.20, η p 2 = 0.04) or “ sex ” × “ task ” ( F (2,80) = 1.69, p = 0.19, η p 2 = 0.04), indicating that the difference in word generation between the two phonemic and semantic tasks and the different instruction conditions did not depend on sex.

Yet, corresponding P 50 Firing values were highly significant compared to 0.5 ( P < 0.001, n = 13 cells from eight animals; single sample t‐test ).

Results Statistically highly significant ( P < 0.001) improvement was observed in BV, FCPG, and DDA as depicted in Table 2 in Group A; analysis of the VFD shows that the result was statistically significant ( P < 0.1).

Highly significant relief ( P < 0.001) was observed in fungal infection, and significant relief ( P = 0.005) was observed in Gram - negative bacterial infection and pus cells in Group A.

Pearson's correlations between the ABI domains and corresponding scales were strongly positive ( r ≥ 0.70) and highly significant ( p < 0.001), showing concurrent validity between the ABI and scales designed to measure similar constructs.

Geographical structuring between ecotypes was also evident and highly significant in the pairwise microsatellite F ST population comparisons ( F ST = 0.385, p < .001).

The full model explained 63% of the task-accuracy variance (adjusted R 2 ) and was highly significant (F 4 , 15 = 9.00, p < 0.001).

Here, highly significant correlations ( p < 0.001) between ELISA and IFA (Spearman r = 0.7984) as well as ELISA and neutralization assay (Pearson r = 0.6432) indicated a high level of agreement between the newly established ELISA and the well-established IFA as well as a previously established neutralization assay.

Highly significant growth-rate inhibitions (ranging between 35% and 58%) were observed (one-way ANOVA: F = 51.925, p < 0.001).

ANOVA analysis for slope increases revealed highly significant group differences [ F (3, 24) = 71.28; P < 0.001].

Factor analysis The dataset’s suitability for factor analysis was assessed via Bartlett’s test of sphericity (highly significant, p<0.001), the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy (0.96) and measures of sampling adequacy (MSA) (>0.9 for each item).

Bartlett’s test was highly significant (p<0.001) for the dataset, as well as for both subsets.

For the general postoperative complications, a highly significant difference to the disadvantage of the paraesophageal hernias (types II–IV) was detected at 6.0 vs 3.0% ( p < 0.001) (Table 4 ).

Differences were considered statistically significant when P ≤ 0.05 (*), very significant when P ≤ 0.01 (**), and highly significant when P ≤ 0.001 (***).

As none of the matched sets had as much overlap as our height GWAS loci, the enrichment we observed for the height GWAS data is highly significant (p<0.001; z-score: 11.88) ( Figure 3c ).

A P -value of <0.05 was considered a statistically significant difference, P <0.01 was considered highly significant difference and P <0.001 was considered very highly significant difference.

= 3, F = 2.35, p = 0.1) but a highly significant improvement across sessions (d.f. = 3, F = 15.47, p < 0.001) in which the sheep improved from 59.0 ± 7.9% in the first to 89.7 ± 4.8% correct in the fourth session ( figure 4 ).

3.4 Several midstream stations showed lower pollution levels in JDS 3 than in JDS 2 A comparison between the midstream data from 2013 (JDS 3) and 2007 (JDS 2) revealed a similar pollution pattern (see ( Kirschner et al., 2009 )) and a highly significant correlation between the years (rho = 0.738; P < 0.001, n = 48).

The difference between the two groups is highly significant (p < .001).