“highly significant”

Statistical significance was established at P ≤ 0.05, with highly significant results defined as P ≤ 0.01 and P ≤ 0.001.

A difference was considered significant when P < 0.05 and highly significant when P < 0.01 .

The Logrank test was used to analyse the significance of the differences between TTE of treated and control tumour groups, with differences deemed significant (*) at 0·01 ≤ P ≤ 0·05, and highly significant (**) at P ≤ 0·01.

Using a log transformation of the difference between pre- and posttitre levels gives a highly significant P value of <.01; the post-booster titre levels were significantly larger than the pre-booster titre levels (see Figure 1 ).

The overall variation among genotypes across all four populations was highly significant ( P = 0.01).

Differences were statistically labeled as significant [*] for p < 0.05 or highly significant [**] for p < 0.01.

There were highly significant ( p < 0.01) variations observed between B. napus commercial and wild Brassicaceae genotypes for sitosterol, isofucosterol, and stigmast-7-enol, whereas it was significant ( p < 0.05) for 24-methylcholesterol, campesterol, sitostanol, and stigmasterol, and non-significant ( p > 0.05) for cholesterol.

Spearman rank correlation also showed a highly significant association between reported urinary schistosomiasis and urine filtration test (r = 0.704; p < 0.01).

Under the “yield” parameter for RE extracts ( Table 2 ), the correlations between yield and TPC/TFC were negative and highly significant ( P < 0.01).

Meanwhile, OPN expression was significantly higher in group A than in group B ( p < 0.05), and RUNX-2 expression was highly significant in group A than in group B ( p < 0.01).

This represented a highly significant improvement (p<0.01) with a large effect size (|r|=0.90).

In all cases, differences were considered to be significant at p<0.05 and to be highly significant at p<0.01.

R ESULTS When the measured parameters were statistically evaluated ( t test) for gender differences [ Table 1 ], MaxRW (R/L), ConH (R/L), CorH (R/L), CorH (R/L), PH (R/L), and gonial angle (R/L) showed highly significant differences statistically between the genders P < 0.01, whereas MinRW (L) and ConH (L) showed less significance ( P < 0.05), and the MinRW (R) did not show any significant difference.

In this study, highly significant correlations ( p < 0.01) were observed among all physico-chemical traits examined.

This result signifies a highly significant improvement (p < 0.01) of the EBA-BPNN model over the BA-BPNN model.

For example, for phospho-PERK, the effect of AOAA in DS was borderline significant in males ( p = 0.058), while in females, it was highly significant ( p < 0.01).

However, the Voa1/Voa2 DKD cells showed a strong reduction (by 60%) in the uptake of [ 3 H]NA compared with control, and this effect was highly significant (n = 6 each, t 10 = 3.69, p < 0.01; Figure 10C ).

Results: There were highly significant increases in hsCRP, TM, vWF, tPA and PAI-1 in both patient groups compared to the control group (P<0.01 for all except for TM between group 2 and 3 P<0.05) with significant increase in group 1 compared to group 2 (P<0.01).

The authors have also highlighted that this decrease in OCR upon H37Rv infection in IFN- γ primed MDMs is highly significant (P < 0.01).

For example, the coefficient for FRY measured in SRT and PYT ( n = 2690) was only 0.12, yet highly significant ( P < 0.01).

Anamnestic response 1 month post-hepatitis B booster was 94.0% and highly significant ( P < 0.01).

Even within this small geographical area, a highly significant proportion of the variation (0.39%, p < 0.01) was found between the regions, a conclusion reinforced by the finding that genetic distances were significantly greater than zero between several of the pairs of subpopulations when either Y-SNPs or Y-STRs were used ( Table 4 ).

2D , there are highly significant differences in WHH between PC (mean ± SEM, 62° ± 3.1°) and DM (mean ± SEM, 48° ± 2.8°) neurons ( P < 0.01, U test) and between PC and DP (mean ± SEM, 46° ± 3.4°) neurons ( P < 0.01, U test).

Regression modeling of replay rate and significance test The regression equation for the reseeding rate Y 1 is: 4 The variance scores are as shown in Table 3 .The fit of this model was highly significant ( P < 0.01).

By querying the Pearson’s Correlation Table (Degree of Freedom = 20, Pearson’s correlation >0.536800), we found that all correlations in the network reached a highly significant level ( p < 0.01).