“highly significant”

The developed model is highly significant ( P = 0.000) and acceptable, showing that pH was the highest significant factor influencing the bioprocess.

Nonparametric statistics suggests a z value of −3.774 with a highly significant P = 0.000.

Adjustment for baseline smoking There is a highly significant correlation (r = 0.95, p < 0.000 for males and r = 0.85, p < 0.000 for females) between the standardised residuals (school effects) for Model 1 when baseline smoking is adjusted for and when it is not (This is further illustrated by comparing Figure 3B and Figure 3C ).

Because the investigated variables were not normally distributed (all p -values were highly significant using the Shapiro–Wilk test: study duration ( p < 0.000), study phases ( p < 0.000)), we employed correlation analysis according to Spearman.

Spearman's rank correlation coefficient between serum IgE levels and the SASSAD score was 96.4% between the two variables, indicating highly significant and positive correlation ( P value = 0.000).

However, pairwise comparisons among native colonies for within and among recovery units were highly significant ( F = 45.358, P = 0.000; Fig. 6 ).

● The number of varroa in the apiary after treatment According to the variance analysis performed with the GLM test, the number of varroa that died varies in a highly significant manner ( p = 0.000, p < 5%), depending on the number of bees in the hives, and does not depend on the number of treatment period.

The correlation between the two SIPRe samples (junior and expert therapists) was highly significant (Spearman’s rho=0.936; p<000).

The neurological recovery was highly significant ( p =0.000 using chi-square test with Yates' correction).

The test showed a highly significant (p = 0.00) difference between the two groups (p<0.01) ( Table 3 ).

The ChIP TF peaks cover 23,225,218 bp (∼23.2% of the genome), and similarly to the bulk ATAC-seq overlaps, the number of TF ChIP-seq peak overlaps is highly significant (Fisher's exact test P = 0).

en that academic success is related to the teacher's pedagogical skills and the student's motivation to assimilate new knowledge. 19 According to Table 2 , the results suggest that in comparing frequencies of the levels of perception of success pedagogy for the feedback dimension, there are highly significant differences (p = 0.000, <0.05). 85% of undergraduate students scored in the high level for feedback, while 53.3% of postgraduate university students scored in the medium level.

The analysis revealed that the feeding method itself had a highly significant impact ( p = 0.000), confirming that IOF is associated with reduced hospital stays.

On the other hand, the isolated effects of the product factor were highly significant, with p = 0.0000 for g s , p = 0.0009 for C i , and p = 0.0031 for E .

The mean HAM-D score was highly significant significantly more in women ( P = 000) than in men [ Table 1 ].

The differences were statistically highly significant ( P = 0.000 for both).

The model explains approximately 22.58 per cent of the variance in intrinsic motivation with a highly significant F value of 43.15 ( p < 0.000).

The differences were highly significant (chi-square=20.650; df = 4; Cramer's V = 0.277; p = 0.000).

The comparison of the SKT profiles between the three diagnostic groups included in the study across all nine subtests revealed a highly significant interaction effect ‘diagnosis × subtest’ (Pillai’s Trace = 0.121 with F (16, 1080) = 4.34, p < 0.000) in a multivariate analysis of variance with repeated measures (MANOVA), which indicates an overall difference of test profiles.

The association between mothers’ Vit-D3 and newborn UCB Vit-D3 was highly significant (R=0.744; P =0.000), indicating a direct dependence of the newborn’s Vit-D3 on the mother’s Vit-D3 sources.

The results from the Mann–Whitney test indicated highly significant statistical differences ( p = 0.00000, α = 0.05) between the analyzed variables, which were also supported by a very high effect size (r = 82%).

ANOVA exhibited highly significant difference (F 10, 43 = 55.08; p ≤ 0.00) between dates of observation and mean comparison of date revealed pre-treatment data differed significantly in the mite population from that of 4th to 25th days after treatment (DAT), whereas there were non-significant differences between mite population of 28th, 31st and 35th days after treatment.

Furthermore, the complete model, including all predictors, was highly significant (Prob >2 (DF = 13), p = 0.000).

However, at T2, there were highly significant differences in UDVA for both eyes between the two groups (right eye: I-J = −0.254, P = 0.000, P < 0.01) (left eye: I-J = −0.242, P = 0.000, P < 0.01).

The ROC derived from the prediction model yielded an area under the curve of 0.70, slightly higher than the ROC of the 10th percentile cut-off. Discussion The association between blink rate and DIP and UPDRS score in patients with SMI is highly significant ( p < 0.000).