“highly significant”

However, histopathology results showed a highly significant association (χ2 = 20.892, p < 0.001), with 84.2% of patients with a positive "Amr sign" having confirmed acute appendicitis, compared to 54.3% in the negative group.

Weekly differences were highly significant ( F = 3.22, p < 0.001, η 2 = 0.51), indicating that age accounted for a substantial portion of variance.

A highly significant association was found between breakfast consumption and mental stress ( χ 2 = 272.725, p < 0.001).

23) In our study, there was also a highly significant correlation between age and baPWV (r=0.57, p<0.001), and after adjusting for age, there was no significant correlation between baPWV either with CACS or with modified Gensini scoring.

A highly significant difference (p < .001, age adjusted) was found for MMSE sum score between individuals with and without self-reported cognitive impairment (CI-group versus Ref-group, Figure 1 ).

However, training demonstrated a highly significant effect ( P < .001), as practitioners who received training scored higher (mean = 70.91, SD = 3.335) compared to those without training (mean = 62.72, SD = 2.963).

The highly significant differences observed in temporal synergy parameters (e.g., p < 0.001) suggest that dopaminergic medication substantially affects motor coordination, even within this cohort.

In contrast, grouping factors including species and treatment explained as much as 74.79% of the variation in fungal communities, with a highly significant effect ( R 2 = 0.7479, p = 0.001).

NP 4.009 ± 0.395) and the highly significant levels during parturition (P, p < 0.001, RFM 8.424 ± 1.894 vs.

Furthermore, the individual slopes relating autoMAPSE to MAP were highly significant ( P < 0.001) and markedly heterogeneous (both positive and negative), suggesting that ventriculoarterial coupling differs substantially in different individual patients.

The correlation between IGF-1 levels and neoplastic growth stimulation was highly significant (p < 0.001), indicating that MØCM IGF-1 levels were directly related to the ability of MØCM to stimulate neoplastic proliferation.

With respect to between-group comparisons, no statistically significant difference was found between the groups in the pretest median Trait Anger scores ( p = 0.291, ES = 0.447, 95% CI: −0.370, 1.250), whereas a highly significant difference was detected between the groups in the posttest median Trait Anger scores ( p < 0.001, ES = 1.481, 95% CI: 0.560, 2.380).

Overall, most covariates were highly significant ( p < 0.001), confirming that the Tweedie GLM effectively captures the variability in insurance claim amounts.

Similarly, the main effect within subjects was highly significant, and the effect size was very large ( M = 7.028, SD = 1.427) ( M = 1.680, SD = 1.877), F (1, 89) = 441.459, p < 0.001, η 2 = 0.832 (see Figure 2 ).

(3) Consistency between C-DOS and C-ONI The two tools demonstrated a highly significant statistical association in binary classification [χ 2 (1) = 200, p < 0.001; OR = 42.8, 95% CI: 20.3–90.2]; however, their agreement was only moderate [κ = 0.50], with 65 cases (9.4%) being classified discordantly.

3 , and this explains why HierFstat analysis reveals a substantial and highly significant contribution of sites ( F SR = 0.069, P -value = 0.001) and an absence of significant contribution of region ( P -value = 0.209).

One-way ANOVA revealed highly significant differences among groups (F(3,8) = 3054.65, p < 0.001).

3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 ) Statistical analysis confirmed these differences to be highly significant (log-rank test, p < 0.001).

Results: Efficacy against Ef showed highly significant differences between groups ( p < 0.001) with lower median CFU/mL in G3 and G4 (Me = 0 [IQR (interquartile range) = 0]: low) and G5 (Me = 6000 [IQR = 45,000]: low/medium) versus negative controls (Me = 378,500 and 5,020,000 [IQR = 4,605,000 and 6,760,000]: medium/high; p ≤ 0.019).

Statistical significance was defined as p ≤ 0.05, while p < 0.01 was considered highly significant, and p < 0.001 indicated very highly significant differences.

Authenticity of CoT responses by reasoning-capable LLMs For reasoning authenticity, the Kruskal-Wallis H test demonstrated highly significant differences in physician ratings among the four models ( p < 0.001).

The Chi-square test revealed a highly significant difference ( χ 2 = 20.92, df = 1, P < 0.001), which was further confirmed by Fisher’s exact test ( P = 9.50 × 10 -6 ).

A P value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant; P values were indicated as follows: ns, not significant; *, P < 0.05, significant; **, P < 0.01, highly significant; ***, P < 0.001 and ****, P < 0.0001, extremely significant.

In addition, the type of closure showed a highly significant difference ( P = 0.001), as extra-peritoneal closure was predominantly used in rectal tumors (78.8%).

The one-way analysis of variance revealed highly significant seasonal differences for all variables measured in both basins ( p < 0.001).