“highly significant”

The obtained data clearly indicated a highly significant inverse correlation between the HADS-A and MAAS scores of these patients ( r = -0.360, P < 0.001).

Statistical analysis revealed that these differences were highly significant (p < 0.001).

Soybean Yield Responses to the Increase in Average Temperature Over the Past 50 Years Our long‐term analysis across eight soybean production systems (rotation × tillage) showed that yields improved as average air temperatures increased, with highly significant relationships ( p = 0.001) observed for both rotation systems (Figure 4 ).

Comparisons indicated that increases in children’s fear beliefs due to fear pairing were approaching borderline significance, F (1, 28) = 3.19, p = .085, r = .32, showing a medium-sized effect ( Cohen, 1988 , 1992 ), and decreases due to happy pairing were highly significant, F (1, 28) = 25.11, p < .001, r = .69.

This is in line with a previous study, which found a highly significant correlation ( p < .001) between AQ scores and OCPD traits ( Gadelkarim et al., 2019 ).

The difference was highly significant (p<0.001, Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-ranks test).

The prognostic score combining these two factors is highly significant ( p = 0.001) (Fig. 2 ).

A highly significant protrusion of the upper incisors (Ui/NL, p < .001) could also be observed between T1-T3.

But as we see the unilaterality is more considerable in assessing all chews not in primary chews, and there should be independent pathways or mechanisms for chewing preference, much more than such simple interferences. As reported by other authors, most of the individuals preferred to chew by the right side, 16 , 18 , 30 and we previously reported highly significant masticatory preference towards the right side ( P <0.001).

The unidimensional structure of ESSI displayed a highly significant Satorra–Bentler scaled chi-square ( S-B χ2 = 119.15; df = 9 p < 0.001) and a value of RMSEA greater than 0.05 (0.101, 90% CI = 0.850–0.117), although other fit indices (CFI = 0.961, SRMR = 0.026) indicated approximation to adequacy of the model fit.

Table 4 unveils the comparative assessment of the before and after training mean oral health knowledge scores of school teachers, and it was found that the increase in knowledge of teachers was highly significant ( P = 0.001).

In total, 118 animals were selected for study as Hi (60 animals) or Lo emitters (58 animals), and displayed highly significant differences in CH 4 yields ( p <0.001, Student’s t-test).

After stratification by sex, the protective effect of the HO-1 (GT)n S/S genotype was highly significant in men (OR 5.50, 95% CI 2.67-11.34, p <0.001), whereas the association was not significant in women (OR 1.60, 95% CI 0.75-3.34, p = 0.228).

Coefficients of determination were relatively high for each individual tree (BB: 0.66 ± 0.19, RO: 0.62 ± 0.12, HE: 0.69 ± 0.11, ME: 0.82 ± 0.17, Supplementary Tables S1–S4 ) and for site mean sap flow (BB: 0.80, RO: 0.68, HE: 0.74, ME: 0.90), all highly significant (p < 0.001).

The final model chosen and included in the manuscript shows the best trade-off between the significance of predictors (Likelihood Ratio Tests for each predictor show highly significant results ( p < 0.001)), model fit/explained variance (Nagelkerke: 0.318; 32%), stability (8.6% zero cells) and interpretability of results.

Change in VAS was highly significant (p<0.001) as compared with placebo by using two sample independent “ t ” test and “Hartley’s f test” for equality of variance ( Table 3 ).

A one-way within-subjects analysis of variance (ANOVA) on the keyword scores showed a highly significant effect of condition on intelligibility, F (10, 210) = 40.651, p < .001, η 2 = 0.659 3 .

We performed a likelihood ratio test of the full model against the model without property.type and the comparison proved highly significant (χ 2 (1) = 25.985, p < 0.001).

Hypertension emerged as the most notable risk factor (OR, 3.0; 95% CI: 2.2-4.1) with a highly significant P<0.001.

Pairwise Pearson’s coefficients of correlation among traits were calculated and highly significant ( p < 0.001) positive correlations were detected between RS and RSTS ( R = 0.999), RS and AAC ( R = 0.464), and RSTS and AAC ( R = 0.461; Figure 2 ).

The analysis generated four discriminant functions which revealed a highly significant difference between call types (Wilks' λ DF1/4 = 0.002, χ 2 = 2446.73, p<0.001; Wilks' λ DF2/4 = 0.088, χ 2 = 934.53, p<0.001; Wilks' DFλ 3/4 = 0.519, χ 2 = 252.48, p<0.001; Wilks' λ DF4 = 0.985, χ 2 = 5.93, p<0.05).

* p < 0.05 was considered significant; ** p < 0.01 was considered highly significant and *** p < 0.001 was considered very highly significant. 3.

Indeed, a highly significant inverse correlation between the MTA3 and SOX2 levels ( r 2 = 0.534, P < 0.001 and r 2 = 0.624, P < 0.001, respectively; Figures 3B,C ) was observed.

The hazard ratio for CVD mortality was significantly lower as year of publication increased (p = 0.023), but still remained highly significant: HR 1.64 (95% CI 1.33 to 2.02, p<0.001) when including only studies published post-2000 in the meta-analysis.

We found this interaction to be highly significant ( p = 0.001).