“highly significant”

However, when only pCx43 colocalized with PDGFRB was expressed, a highly significant decrease in expression was found, at the level of p < 0.0001 ( Figure 11 ).

The changes with time were, as expected from earlier studies (Lee et al.,, 1991a) very highly significant, but more interestingly so was the interaction between time and dose (P<0.0001).

The mean value of TC in the TRM and non-TRM groups using the Mann-Whitney U test registered a highly significant p-value <0.0001 at 18 months, with a decrease of 14.17% from baseline in the TRM group and a decrease of 1.53% from baseline in the non-TRM group.

Change in bodyweight, but not epididymal fat mass, had a significant effect on xenograft mass (P = 0.0069), but the effect of treatment was still highly significant (P < 0.0001) and the differences between groups treated with vehicle, HI or IX10 were fully comparable to the effects observed when the effect of bodyweight was not included in the analysis (Supplementary Table S4 ).

However, a highly significant heterogeneity of the included studies was observed with an I 2 of 87% ( p < 0.0001) (Fig. 3 ).

When the MGEs are included (Figure 5a ), all pairwise comparisons between the four different sub-groups (fourth, Asian, Turkish and South American) show highly significant differences ( P < 0.0001; red arrows) except for the fourth sub-group versus South American ( P < 0.05; brown arrow).

The cranial base length showed a weak negative correlation with AHI ( ρ = −0.25; p < 0.05) but showed a strong and highly significant correlation with the mandibular length ( ρ = 0.70; p < 0.0001).

Moreover, all factors were highly significant ( p < 0.01%) for the anti-candida activity response ( Y2 ).

The adequacy of uterine tone was highly significant (p < 0.0001) after three minutes of uterotonic administration in the carbetocin group.

The two new functions cumulatively explained 100% of the total variance: Canonical 1 (Can1) explains 71% of the variation among the three groups with a highly significant probability ( p < 0.0001), while canonical 2 (Can2) explains the remaining 29% with a significant probability ( p < 0.005).

At the same time, higher LGR4 positivity was observed in the normal mucosa than in the tumour tissue, with a highly significant difference (93% and 36%, P<0.0001).

Further analysis of the significance based on paired t tests indicated that the differences in the red reflectance between MODIS and the other sensors were highly significant ( p < 0.0001).

A highly significant association between strong CENPF expression and early PSA recurrence was seen in all tumors ( p <0.0001, Figure 6A ) and in the subset of ERG fusion-negative cancers ( p <0.0001, Figure 6B ).

The models highlighted below were all highly significant ( p < 0.0001).

In fact, cladistic analyses, indicating that the appendix has evolved independently at least twice (once in diprotodont marsupials and once in Euarchontoglires), show a highly significant ( P < 0.0001) phylogenetic signal in its distribution, and has been maintained in mammalian evolution for 80 millions years or longer [ 15 ].

3.2 Lennox–Gastaut syndrome The global association between etiological group and LGS was highly significant (Fisher's Exact Test, p < 0.0001).

The same trend was observed on the fifth day with a very highly significant difference (df = 27; F = 12.67; p < 0.0001) observed between the treatments.

Two biological replicates were analyzed for all conditions (i.e., n = 2 per condition), and highly significant ( P < 0.0001) Pearson correlation coefficient values were obtained for each replicate set ( r = 0.9 and 0.855 for p65 ChIP replicates; r = 0.849 and 0.85 for BMAL1 ChIP replicates, and r = 0.890 and 0.888 for CLOCK ChIP replicates in saline and LPS conditions, respectively) ( Supplemental Fig.

Cosmetic camouflage was found to reduce DQLI (dermatology quality of life index) (DLQI consists of 10 questions concerning patients’ perception of the impact of skin diseases each scored between 0–4 giving a range of 0–40) from 16.67 ± 3.87 and to 2.23 ± 1.16 after its use, the difference (14.67 ± 3.87) was found to be statistically highly significant (p < 0.0001) [ 24 ].

As expected, there were highly significant differences among the three regional comparisons (Friedman ANOVA: χ 2 2df = 77.82; p <0.0001).

The models were highly significant (p<0.0001) with a non-significant lack of fit (p=0.2729 and 0.1283, respectively).

The difference in the survival rates between genotypes is highly significant with values of P < 0.0001.

Firstly, the gesture-only conditions (blurred, pointing, give-me gestures) were statistically investigated in a 2-way ANOVA (Time window × Gesture type) calculated across the three time windows, which revealed a highly significant interaction (F(4, 96) = 8.47, ε = 0.66, p = 0.0001, η p 2 = 0.26).

While both regions act as mild enhancers in our assay, only the second variant (SNP 2) had a strong and highly significant difference in expression between the social and solitary alleles (Fig. 4c ; one-way ANOVA, F 4,20 = 65.0119, p < 0.0001).

(20.6) 255 (79.4) 321 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 Subtotal 215 (18.8) 930 (81.1) 1,145 98 (17.1) 474 (82.9) 572 Children's Health * Low birth weight and cooking smoke in Guatemala Environmental Health Perspectives * VOLUME 110 | NUMBER 1 | January 2002 111 combined and between clean fuels and open fire users are highly significant (p < 0.0001).