“highly significant”

Among the outliers detected by coalescent simulations assuming a neutral island model, five were highly significant ( P <0.0001; Table 3 ).

Both results are highly significant ( p < 0.0001, φ = 0.17 regarding overall publications and 0.18 in the case of lead authorships).

χ 2 test comparison of incidence and prevalence over the periods 2007 to 2014 (mean incidence 1.01/10,000, mean prevalence 0.88/10,000) and 2015 to 2021 (mean incidence 0.67/10,000, mean prevalence 0.33/10,000) showed a highly significant decrease ( p < 0.0001).

During the dark phase of the dark/light cycle these differences were highly significant (all p < 0.0001) indicating that the states of vigilance in older mice were less consolidated compared to young mice.

There was a highly significant improvement ( P ≤ 0.0001) for all of the efficacy variables in oclacitinib-treated dogs compared with placebo-treated dogs.

However, it should not pass without notice that many of the incremental reductions in Table 4 are highly significant ( p < .0001) up to about n -5.

Correlation between all Smads in the ALS samples was highly significant (Fig. 1B ), with Smad1 and 5 being the strongest (Pearson coefficient of 0.88, P < 0.0001).

Meanwhile, the TyG index and NAFLD risk showed a highly significant overall correlation ( p < 0.0001) and nonlinearity ( p < 0.0001) according to the limited cubic splines.

Regarding the effect of adding sweet apricot kernel powder on TPC, DPPH, ABTS, syneresis, viscosity and acidity, a highly significant increase was observed (p≤0.0001).

The superiority of BBSNet is statistically unequivocal, as confirmed by highly significant t -tests (all p -values < 0.0001) comparing its performance to each benchmark backbone.

Nevertheless, its effect remained highly significant (p < 0.0001), confirming a strong association between SF-AGR and PJI occurrence. 3.5 Receiver operating characteristic curve We used the PJI group as the positive sample and the aseptic revision group as the negative sample, and then performed feature modeling based on SF-AGR, SE-AGR, ESR, CRP, and SF-PMN% ( Figure 3 ).

From the table, it is easy to see that the regression model reached a highly significant level ( p < 0.0001), with a good fit (R 2 = 0.9848).

Statistical analysis using a chi-square test confirmed a highly significant association between the leg-feathering phenotype and the genotype of this deletion(χ2 = 60.2, df = 1, p < 0.0001).

TRAT1 and KLRK1 were also highly significant ( p < 0.0001), and ROC analysis revealed 83.3% sensitivity and 96.77% specificity for TRAT1 counts >213, and 100% sensitivity and 96.77% specificity for KLRK1 counts >292.5.

However, regarding the branch of study (pre-clinical (anatomy, biochemistry, physiology, and pharmacology), para-clinical (pathology, microbiology, and radiology), and clinical (surgery, medicine, gynecology, pediatrics, pulmonary medicine, etc.)), a highly significant difference in mean marks was observed, indicating that the branch of study significantly influences BCBR course performance (p = 0.0001).

As expected, there was a highly significant difference between ISIs (F = 23.53; P < 0.0001).

At the α = 0.05 level (ANOVA statistical analyses), there is a highly significant difference in the surficial N + charge density (F (5, 12) = 587.60, p < 0.0001), exchange capacity (F (5, 12) = 367.50, p < 0.0001), and antibacterial efficiency (F (6, 14) = 205.68, p < 0.0001).

The overall neutrality test was highly significant for Fu’s Fs (Fs = 14.407, p < 0.0001) and also in CH (Fs = 8.772, p < 0.01), suggesting population expansion or directional selection.

According to the statistical analysis, the concentration of DBA (X 3 ) had a highly significant effect ( P < 0.0001) on the SPF and sunscreen efficacy of the fabricated oleogels (Fig. 6 C & F).

Results The logistic regression model used to predict the lifetime diagnosis of hypocalcaemia in adults with 22q11·2DS was highly significant (likelihood ratio test: χ 2 = 38·2, df = 7, P < 0·0001).

Survival benefit and safety profile Kaplan–Meier survival analysis revealed a highly significant intergroup difference (log-rank test, P < 0.0001).

The decline with age was highly significant ( p < 0.0001 in lme).

These differences were highly significant (**** p < 0.0001), demonstrating preservation of sensory function with both treatments.

Using a generalized linear model, honey type, bacterial strain, as well as the interaction between both, all had a highly significant impact ( P < 0.0001) on the inhibition of bacterial growth.

This increase was highly significant (p<0.0001).