“highly significant”

Dynamics of Post-Ingestive Sensations A highly significant effect of time ( p ≤ 0.0001) was seen for all post-ingestive sensation variables across test meals: Energized (F = 18.45, p < 0.0001), Relaxation (F = 5.38, p < 0.0001), Concentration (F = 13.89, p < 0.0001), Sleepiness (F = 7.42, p < 0.0001), Fullness (F = 88.78, p < 0.0001), Hunger (F = 64.22, p

The Chi-squared test revealed a highly significant variation in prevalence across districts ( χ 2 = 1003·36, P < 0·0001).

RSPM performance (M = 62%, SD = 21%) was highly varied across participants, and linear modeling indicated a highly significant relationship between RSPM accuracy and both D’ sensitivity for texts (b = 0.81, p = .0001) and overall judgment accuracy for comments (b = 0.29, p = .0001).

As shown in Figure 5 C, the results of specificity testing using a double-antibody sandwich ELISA indicated that, compared with the blank control, the assay had a highly significant ability to detect the SARS-CoV-2 N protein ( p < 0.0001).

Importantly the significance was increasing over the following days of the experiment reaching the highly significant level (p < 0.0001) in the last six days.

Both cRBF and eGFR demonstrated a highly significant increase at 3 months compared to baseline (mean cRBF 251.71 ± 78.27 vs. 486.61 ± 156.08 ml/kidney/min, p = 0.0001; mean eGFR 46.62 ± 16.36 vs. 69.81 ± 24.83 ml/min/1.73 m 2 ; p = 0.02) and remained consistent until the end of the observed period.

Regression coefficients and factor significance The full quadratic model’s ANOVA (Table 4 ) revealed a highly significant overall fit (F = 15.29, p < 0.0001), with R2 = 0.934, adjusted R2 = 0.879, and predicted R2 ≈ 0.65.

At the same time, the linear factor temperature (A) and the quadratic factors (A 2 and C 2 ) are highly significant, as their p-value is less than 0.0001 (p-value < 0.0001).

All of these differences were highly significant ( p -value < 0.0001), see also Table S2 .

The spline for child age was highly significant ( χ 2 = 459.23, df = 8, p < 0.0001) and showed a more complex functional form (EDF = 6.95).

Furthermore, both IgG1 rK39 RDTs (n = 38) and ELISAs showed a highly significant difference in test outcomes between cured patients and those who relapsed (n = 23; P < .0001).

Results ( Table 2 ) showed that the effect of subjects on aroma release was highly significant ( p < 0.0001) for all the assayed compounds ( Table 2 ), which indicated a high interindividual variability on the immediate oral release of esters.

The regression and correlation analyses between gestational age and the studied parameters were highly significant ( p < 0.0001).

Stringent filtering was further applied, where, unique homopolymer indels (alt allele length range 5–7 bp) with very highly significant fisher’s exact test P value < 0.0001 that were present in ≥ 80% (at least 6 out of 7) MSI-H cases but not in MSS cases were identified.

Incorporating BTE-RAG substantially increased accuracy to 75.8%, corresponding to an absolute improvement of 24.8 percentage points, which was highly significant by paired analysis (McNemar P < 0.0001; Supplementary Table S3 ).

Paired Wilcoxon rank sum tests revealed highly significant differences ( P < 0.0001 for BLAST and k-mer matching) in accuracy favoring the rRNA operon.

The pathway of flavonoid biosynthesis had the highest rich factor and was very highly significant ( P -value < 0.0001) in the pathway enrichment of continuously upregulated DEGs.

Specifically, CHRNA5 , HYKK , and PSMA4 demonstrated highly significant differential expression between LC patients and healthy controls (Wilcoxon test, P < 0.0001).

The likelihood of having both STIs and BV was highly significant compared to having only one infection (chi-square 72.03; p<0.0001).

For aPTT the R 2 value was 0.36 highly significant ( P < .0001) but the median value resulted (36.2 seconds, 95% CI: 35-36.8 seconds) very close to the normal range (25-35 seconds).

The comparison of mean GR values between baseline and 9 months shows a reduction of 3.650 mm which is statistically highly significant ( t = 17.49, P = 0.0001).

These differences were highly significant (p < 0.0001) (Lundström et al. 2011 ).

Between Groups I and III and Groups I and IV, there was a statistically highly significant difference ( P = 0.0001).

Second, a linear regression of perch temperature over mean environmental temperature is highly significant ( P < 0.0001) and the slope of 0.897 is significantly different from a slope of 1 ( t = −3.233, df = 177; P < 0.005).

The two way ANOVA tests for multiple comparisons showed that the mean differences between the cell lysis data for all three MOIs and control are highly significant ( P < 0.0001).