“highly significant”

The DSMB recommended to stop the trial enrolment on the basis of: (i) clear benefit in the primary endpoint in the ‘stratified treatment’ arm (observed difference in SAQSS between groups was highly significant [ t = 7.25, P < .0001], with the corresponding Z -score [6.42] exceeding the O’Brien–Fleming boundary [Z = 2.74], confirming the robustness of the result and a low risk of false-positive conclusion due to interim testing); (ii) a numerically higher rate of MACE in the ‘standard of care’ arm; (iii)

A global test for differences was highly significant (p<0·0001), as was a test for trend (p<0·0001, figure 3 ).

However, intragroup comparison for hardness values showed a statistically highly significant difference for Group 1 ( P < 0.0001) and a nonsignificant difference ( P = 0.4831) for Group 2.

When articles were normalized to ensure that each journal counted equally, differences for Altmetric scores and number of tweets were highly significant ( p < 0.0001, Table 3 ).

The Bartlett test for sphericity was highly significant (p < 0.0001), as a result, the data is suitable for EFA.

This represents a highly significant reduction in relapse rate compared to the pre-RTX period (paired t -test, p < 0.0001; see Figure 1 ).

This behavior for the 31-mm balloon is illustrated by the highly significant negative correlation between intraluminal pressure and ovality index observed in both 24-mm and 30-mm PV models (p < 0.0001 and p < 0.0001, respectively), indicating reduced occlusion efficacy in increasingly elliptical anatomies.

Hydroxyl radical generation measured by HPF fluorescence increased significantly at all tested time points (Figure S3a ; GLM, p < 0.0001 at 5 min, p = 0.0012 at 10 min, and p = 0.0002 at 30 min), while hydrogen peroxide generation remained highly significant throughout visible‐light irradiation (Figure S3b ; GLM, p < 0.0001 at 5, 10, and 30 min), indicating the involvement of multiple ROS pathways in the photodynamic process.

The Kruskal–Wallis test revealed a highly significant effect of propolis extract concentration on bacterial growth inhibition (χ 2 = 116.66, df = 9, p < 0.0001).

Not surprisingly, in the Cox-binomial model with no other covariate this difference is highly significant (p-value < 0.0001).

Unsurprisingly, the choice of antibiotic had a highly significant effect ( p < 0.0001, F = 43.0).

Highly significant differences were observed in 30 traits among all 22 provenances ( p < 0.0001).

Differences were highly significant compared with baseline ( P < 0.0001) and significant for the difference between systolic blood pressure values ( P = 0.011).

The between-group difference at Day 28 and the between-group difference in change from baseline were both highly significant (both p < 0.0001; Figure 2 A).

MyHC and MEF2C protein expression levels gradually increased along with differentiation, the relative quantitative analysis of the proteins was highly significant ( p < 0.0001, Figure 2 C,D) and consistent with their mRNA results.

The test for heterogeneity remained highly significant (Wald Q = 208.05, df = 31, P < 0.0001; likelihood ratio test Q = 192.90, df = 31, P < 0.0001), further confirming inconsistency across the included datasets.

In a similar vein, a study observed a markedly reduced incidence of desaturation in the dexmedetomidine cohort (4 patients) when juxtaposed with the fentanyl cohort (25 patients), achieving a highly significant p-value (P <0.0001) [ 14 ].

That approach resulted in similar results as in the linear models described above, with highly significant associations between low BDE-47 concentrations and the genotypes with MAF in the 0.36-0.45 range (all p = 10 -4 to 10 -6 )(data not shown).

T 2 w 2D TSE Statistical analysis showed that the difference between the quantitative metrics of corrected and uncorrected images was highly significant ( p < 0.0001) for both SI and AES.

Results The Procrustes ANOVA showed highly significant differences between calcanea, both in size and shape ( p < 0.0001).

The resulting quadratic model was statistically robust (R 2 = 0.874; adjusted R 2 = 0.845; p < 0.0001), with DNA:PEI ratio emerging as the dominant determinant of titre, supported by highly significant linear ( p < 0.0001) and quadratic ( p = 0.00028) terms.

The improved correlation of histopathology and clinical data was highly significant ( p <.0001).

Linear regression of bill length versus PC1 of seasonality was also highly significant ( p < 0.0001; R 2 = 0.44; Fig. 4 ).

We observed that higher TSC correlated strongly with poorer outcomes and was highly significant with regard to disease progression when dichotomized at the median (median OS: 13 months vs 136, p < 0.0001 and median PFS: 5 months vs 85 months, p < 0.0001) ( Fig. 4 A and 4 B). p16-positive OPSCC have a proportionally smaller tumor stroma contact surface compared with p16-negative OPSCC We observed that the TSC was significantly higher in p16-negative OPSCC as compared to their p16-positive counterparts.

The overall model was highly significant, with a model p -value < 0.0001, whereas the lack of fit was not significant ( p > 0.05).