“highly significant”

The regression equation between the independent and dependent variables was derived from the fitting process: Y = 29.52 + 0.9 A + 0.6375 B ‐ 1.24 C + 0.675 AB ‐ 0.375 AC ‐ 0.3 BC ‐ 1.76 A 2 ‐ 1.54 B 2 ‐ 2.33 C 2 R 2 = 0.994 The regression model for EE was highly significant ( P < 0.0001), while the lack-of-fit term was non-significant ( P = 0.6507), indicating good model adequacy.

Results : There was a highly significant difference in judged recovery time (ME/CFS = 12.7 ± 1.2 d; CTL = 2.1 ± 0.2 d, mean ± s.e.m., Chi 2 = 90.1, p < 0.0001).

Comparisons to controls There were highly significant differences on the task for the ability to correctly identify the original pictures (F(1,301) = 124.4, P <0.0001) and the ability to identify the closely similar pictures (F(1,301) = 68.4, P <0.0001).

Statistical analysis of the IC 50 values for all essential PBPs demonstrated a highly significant reduction in drug affinity in the IS 48 clinical isolate compared with the ATCC 49175 reference strain ( p < 0.0001).

Statistical significance was defined as non-significant ( ns P -value >0.05), significant (* P -value ≤0.05), very significant (** P -value ≤0.01), highly significant (*** P -value ≤0.001), and extremely significant (**** P -value ≤0.0001).

He found that there was a highly significant positive correlation between EPDS scores on the two occasions (Spearman rank correlation r=0.59, p<0.0001). 13 Although studies performed in the immediate postnatal period are likely to pick up many cases of postnatal blues, Dennis and McQueen 14 found that mothers with an EPDS score >12 at 1 week postnatal were significantly more likely at 4 and/or 8 weeks to discontinue breastfeeding, be unsatisfied with their infant-feeding method, experience significant breastfeeding problems and report lower levels of breastfeeding self-efficacy.

Discrimination models were examined using OPLS-DA, revealing highly predictive (Q2 > 0.63) and highly significant ( p < 0.0001) differences between sTBI patients and OI controls using metabolic profiles obtained by DI/LC–MS/MS and 1 H-NMR on day 4 post-injuries (Fig. 1 ).

Pairwise correlations (Table 5 ) were highly significant ( P <0.0001).

Statistical analysis verified this difference as highly significant (t ≈ 24, df = 4, p < 0.0001), demonstrating that the functionalized inductor surface maintains high molecular specificity toward its target analyte.

Two-way MANOVA on vector components ( Table 2 ) showed a highly significant effect of angle on combined magnitude and direction (Pillai = 1.202, p < 0.0001), while device type was not significant ( p = 0.569).

The t -tests approached significance for the N1 AEP ( p = 0.06) and was highly significant for the P2 AEP ( p = 0.0001).

Gal-9 induced a substantial, highly significant ( P < 0.0001), and dose-dependent increase in SARS-CoV-2 cell-surface attachment ( Figure 2 A).

As shown in Figure 4 B, PMA treatment induced a robust and highly significant increase in PKC activity ( p < 0.0001), validating that functional PKC is present and responsive in our membrane fractions.

Regarding the increase in bitterness and specially astringency observed during wine oxidation are consistent with the highly significant increase in tannin activity (F = 37.53; p < 0.0001) from 2798 ± 577 J mol −1 to 4353 ± 663 J mol −1 .

This strategy showed highly significant differences between FM patients and control subjects (p < 0.0001 and p = 0.0002, for two separate control populations, respectively).

The improvement was highly significant (baseline mean score (SD) = 24.1 (2.71); final mean score (SD) = 9.11 (6.15); paired t test: t = 7.23, df = 8, P = 0.0001).

The decrease from 16 to 20 years of age (76.22%) to 31 to 35 years of age (60.13%) is statistically highly significant ( p < 0.0001).

Highly significant nucleotide compositional bias ( P > .0001) is likely to affect the choice of codon and A/U is expected to occur most frequently at the third codon position in the MERS-CoV genes.

Highly significant intraobserver agreement was observed between the measurements of the two 6 MWT trials (ICC = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.85–0.97; p < 0.0001).

However, the separation of the survival curves was highly significant (log-rank P < 0.0001), confirming the preventive effect of the intervention over time.

All associations were highly significant in both sexes, P <0.0001.

The analyses showed highly significant, strong positive correlations between total AA intake and total fat mass normalized to energy intake ( R 2 = 0.39, P < 0.0001).

A paired t-test was applied and with considering a significance threshold of 0.05, the difference in forecasting accuracy between the models showed to be highly significant with p ≤ 0.0001 across subjects.

Tukey tests showed that this interaction was due to a substantial and highly significant right hemifield advantage for extrafoveal stimuli (left hemifield 57%, right hemifield 77%; p <0.0001) and no significant effect of hemifield for foveal stimuli (left hemifield 66%, right hemifield 65%, p >.50).

Levene’s test for homogeneity of variance from means is highly significant ( p < 0.0001).