“highly significant”

It was noticed that there were strong positive linear correlations between the three imaging modalities concerning density measures: r = 0.95 (MRI and DBT), r = 0.97 (FFDM and DBT), and r = 0.87 (FFDM and MRI), with highly significant differences between FFDM and DBT/MRI ( p < 0.0001) but no significant differences between DBT and MRI ( p > 0.05).

For instance, for the 2.5% trials with the lowest OpticF, a regression of the L F P 4 − 16 H z power on Synch had an R 2 = 0.096 which was highly significant ( t -test p < 0.0001 ).

The linear regression reveals a strong, positive, and statistically highly significant correlation between the AFB smear grade and the MPT64 concentration ( R = 0.777, P < 0.0001) ( Figure 1B ).

Consistent with this, there was a highly significant correlation between the levels of anti-Sm near the time of biopsy and at the time of patient enrollment ( p < 0.0001) (Fig. 3 D).

When segregating the High Ratio Group (n = 1,934) into the 2% cutoff categories and then comparing TTFT, again a highly significant difference was seen ( Figure 2C ; median TTFT: 2.59 vs. 9.38 years; P < 0.0001).

The two-way ANOVA revealed highly significant between-subject effects for all scores and subscores ( p < 0.0001).

ANOVA The one-way ANOVA in supplementary Table 8 revealed a highly significant effect of solvent composition on Arsenic recovery (F(3, 8) = 268.3, p < 0.0001).

The between-group difference at Day 28 and the between-group difference in change from baseline were both highly significant (both p < 0.0001; Figure 2 A).

Statistical analysis confirmed a highly significant efficacy of Pr10-MMAE treatment compared to both the control and free-MMAE-treated groups ( p < 0.0001). 3.3.

The stratified log-rank test showed a highly significant difference between groups ( P < 0.0001), and the stratified Cox model produced a hazard ratio of 0.30 (95% CI 0.223–0.408), indicating a 70% lower risk of recurrence with the firsekibart group compared with the positive control.

The Kruskal–Wallis test revealed a highly significant effect of propolis extract concentration on bacterial growth inhibition (χ 2 = 116.66, df = 9, p < 0.0001).

Crucially, the interaction between genotype and group status was highly significant (F 2,509 = 22.14, p < 0.0001, η 2 = 0.080), with a statistical power of 99%.

PRO was significantly higher in all groups except the WNF‐L group, with highly significant increases in the FOS‐H and SDF‐H groups ( p < .0001).

The ANOVA of FCCCD demonstrated that the model used for CNPs green synthesis was highly significant, as was evident from the model F -value of 182.74 with a very low P- value of < 0.0001 (Table 2 ).

Effect of Process Variables on Sphericity Factor and Roundness Table 2 shows that both the sphericity factor and roundness were significantly influenced by the independent variables with highly significant regression models ( p < 0.0001), high coefficients of determination (R 2 > 0.98) and non-significant lack of fit ( p > 0.05).

Compared with the control group, the 1 μM-treated group showed a significant reduction in viability ( p < 0.05), whereas the 2 μM-treated group exhibited a highly significant decrease ( p < 0.0001), as well as a significant reduction compared with the 1 μM-treated group ( p < 0.05).

All three responses demonstrate predictive capability with R 2 values ranging from 0.8418 to 0.9576 with a highly significant p -value ( p < 0.0001).

Turkish studies consistently confirmed the association of ARMS2 A69S variant with AMD risk, with odds ratios ranging from 3.0 to 8.56 (95% CI: 1.23–20.83) and p values ≤ 0.008, including highly significant results (p < 0.0001).

The resulting quadratic model was statistically robust (R 2 = 0.874; adjusted R 2 = 0.845; p < 0.0001), with DNA:PEI ratio emerging as the dominant determinant of titre, supported by highly significant linear ( p < 0.0001) and quadratic ( p = 0.00028) terms.

This reduction in mean score was highly significant ( p < 0.0001) ( Figure 1 ).

Line effect The morphometric data on Ca.Th and %PoV indicated that the CC line had a highly significant effect, with p < 0.0001 for both traits (Table 1 ).

Generally, a p -value less than 0.05 indicates that the corresponding factor is significant. Therefore, the quadratic polynomial model established in this experiment is highly significant ( p < 0.0001). 55 The model’s R 2 is 0.9757, and the adjusted R 2 is 0.9514, indicating a good fit with minimal experimental error.

Conversely, highly significant differences were observed comparing NMRs between the LICs ( P <0.0001: ET vs.

In the present study, untreated diabetic animals (Group II) exhibited a marked increase in water intake, reaching mean values of 31.2 ± 9.4 mL/day, compared to 10.8 ± 3.2 mL/day in the normal control group (Group I), the difference being highly significant ( p < 0.0001).

In contrast, genotypic variance was highly significant ( p < 0.0001), demonstrating substantial genetic variation for FLS resistance within the population.