The chi-square values in the table indicates that the three smoothing terms i.e., EWMA temperature, humidity and their interaction are highly significant (P < 0.0001).
← all phrases
“highly significant”
Sighted at
p=0.09
In the literature
Cox regression detected a highly significant constant temperature effect on post-storage germination (Wald χ 2 = 36.69, p < 0.0001).
Among both British and Scandinavian populations, LD-based estimates of effective population size were similar to census population sizes and showed a highly significant relationship ( F 1,33 = 37.12, p < 0.0001; Fig. 3 ; data are presented in Supplementary Table S8 ).
Analysis using a reduced quadratic model showed that the model was highly significant, with an F-value of 17.86 ( p < 0.0001).
This difference was highly significant (χ 2 1 = 73.21, p < .0001).
The main effect for each of these SNPs individually is highly significant (OR: 3.16; 95% C.I.: 3.16, 7.347; P < 10 -4 and OR: 0.26; 95% C.I.: 0.13, .55; P < 10 -6 , respectively).
The effect of tumour load on recurrence was pronounced; in general, recurrence rates in the SLN-positive and SLN-negative groups were 35.0 and 10.9% respectively, the difference being highly significant ( P <0.0001, log-rank test) (cf.
The ROC analysis showed an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.78, with a highly significant p -value of < 0.0001, as illustrated in Fig. 2 .
In both the 3-month and 12-month follow-up intervals, comparison of cyst volumes with the preoperative baselines demonstrated highly significant differences in both time intervals ( p < 0.0001) (Fig. 2 ).
Overall, AMOVA revealed a highly significant genetic variation among populations ( P < 0.0001; Table 4 ) accounting for 13.5% of the total variation.
The CMH test is highly significant with p <0.0001.
This difference is statistically highly significant (p<0.0001).
Specifically, in the Tris-sucrose buffer group, increasing the concentration from 15 mg/mL to 45 mg/mL resulted in a highly significant increase in protein expression ( p < 0.0001).
Thermal Detection Thresholds ANCOVA with age as a covariate (partialing out the highly significant age-related effects) revealed a highly significant effect of group (F 2,113 = 30.04, p<<0.0001), body side (ipsilateral vs. contralateral: F 1,113 = 12.39, p<0.001) and group x side interaction (F 2,113 = 4.65, p<0.05) for the cold detection threshold (CDT).
The comparison of the tolerated dose at OFC to baseline showed a highly significant increase ( p < 0.0001; Wilcoxon signed‐ranks test; Figure 3 ).
A repeated-measures ANOVA showed a highly significant effect of drug condition ( F (3,21) = 20.3, P < 0.0001).
Statistical analysis supported these findings: two-way repeated-measures ANOVA showed a highly significant treatment effect (p < 0.0001), with Dunnett’s post hoc tests revealing intense erythema and edema responses only in the positive control (MD 1.48–3.83, p < 0.0001), while Novostron did not differ from the negative control at any observation point.
The between-subjects effect of treatment group was highly significant ( p < 0.0001 at all time points), reflecting the consistently higher amylase levels in the NNRTI/PI group compared to the INSTI group throughout the entire observation period.
The global correlation across all time points remained highly significant (ρ = 0.65, p < 10 −4 ).
In both species there is a highly significant increase of segmental duplications around inversion breakpoints as compared to the genome-wide average ( p < 0.0001 in both genomes).
Notwithstanding the smaller sample size at FP + 14, the platelet increase observed at FP + 14 was highly significant (p < 0.0001).
Both differences were highly significant (p < .0001) [61].
One-year survival for good, moderate, and poor risk groups were 48.5, 25.7, and 11%, respectively, with a highly significant difference among the three groups ( P <0.0001).
The CXCL12-induced increases in cell number observed after 7 days were therefore always highly significant ( P <0.0001).
The ANOVA analysis showed highly significant differences ( p < 0.0001) in the antioxidant activity between H and ZnO NP-loaded formulations, except between HZ 5 and HZ 7.5, where no significant differences were observed.