“highly significant”

Effect of HLA alleles on the relation of SD ( r ′ ) versus age There was a highly significant, positive overall dependence of SD ( r ′ ) on age ( Figure 1 ; P < .001).

ANC visits demonstrated a highly significant relationship ( p < .001), as did maternal tetanus vaccination ( p < .001).

The decrease in acrosome integrity from one storage time to the next was highly significant throughout the trial (p < 0.001).

A study examining the incidence of perineal trauma found rates of 7% in the occipito-posterior position compared to 1% in the occipito-anterior position, with the difference being highly significant ( p < 0.001) [ 19 ].

The full model explained 63% of the task-accuracy variance (adjusted R 2 ) and was highly significant (F 4 , 15 = 9.00, p < 0.001).

Accordingly, terrestrial prey-capture in the aquatic stage can be referred to as “jaw prehension.” Flexibility of behavior: kinematic differences between the four feeding modes The MANOVA with mode treated as fixed factor showed a highly significant overall difference between the four feeding-modes (Wilks’ lambda F = 16.26, P < 0.001).

Here, highly significant correlations ( p < 0.001) between ELISA and IFA (Spearman r = 0.7984) as well as ELISA and neutralization assay (Pearson r = 0.6432) indicated a high level of agreement between the newly established ELISA and the well-established IFA as well as a previously established neutralization assay.

The increase was more evident in the 100 mg/kg ICA group compared with the 25 mg/kg ICA group, with a highly significant difference (*** p < 0.001).

Highly significant correlations were found between serum levels of C3 and C4 to drug retention time ( P < .001, Fig. 1 ).

From post-wounding day 4 onwards, 5% (w/w) aqueous fraction ointments showed highly significant ( p < 0.001) wound contraction when compared to all simple, 5% (w/w) ethyl acetate fraction, 10% (w/w) ethyl acetate fraction, 5% (w/w) hexane fraction, and 10% (w/w) hexane fraction ointments.

Results The width increases were highly significant, both in the overall and in the individual groups ( p < 0.001).

Highly significant growth-rate inhibitions (ranging between 35% and 58%) were observed (one-way ANOVA: F = 51.925, p < 0.001).

This increasing trend is highly significant with p -value < 0.001 (Table 2 ) 25 .

In addition, the intervention population showed significant improvements in two of the five investigated SF-36 scales at study end (vitality and mental health) compared to baseline scores, which for vitality was highly significant (p < 0.001).

Weight, BMI, and %TWL The weight and BMI mean ± SD showed highly significant differences with time from preoperative value till 24 months postoperative by repeated measure ANOVA ( p < 0.001) with highly significant differences, and positive correlation within each pair of successive readings by paired t test till 24 months postoperative (71.5 ± 10.8 kg and 25.6 ± 3.4 kg/m 2 at 24 months respectively) (Tables 3 and 4 ).

All eight of these matches were highly significant ( p ≤ 0.001) In seven out of ten cases, visual inspection leaves little doubt that the motifs are essentially identical, while the final and most divergent case (TIFDMEM0000057 versus Motif 8) shows some differences.

Sensitivity analysis excluding women with cervical dilatation > 6 cm n = 270) showed similar, highly significant associations between the total score of the GebStart-tool and all intervals describing care needs (p < 0.001 for all associations).

ANOVA analysis for slope increases revealed highly significant group differences [ F (3, 24) = 71.28; P < 0.001].

Increased maternal stroking at 5 weeks specifically reduced methylation in this group as evidenced in a highly significant statistical interaction between the membership of this group and maternal stroking when infants were 5 weeks old (coefficient=−2.754, s.d.=0.573, P <0.001).

When all PPIPs are considered, we find a highly significant excess of PPIP adaptation in rodents and primates (both p<0.001; Fig 7 ).

The noted difference was statistically highly significant ( P <0.001).

Factor analysis The dataset’s suitability for factor analysis was assessed via Bartlett’s test of sphericity (highly significant, p<0.001), the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy (0.96) and measures of sampling adequacy (MSA) (>0.9 for each item).

Bartlett’s test was highly significant (p<0.001) for the dataset, as well as for both subsets.

When the effect of patient insurance status was controlled the association remained highly significant ( r = 0.392, n = 202, p = 0.001).

Pairwise comparisons between groups with differing glycemic control using Dunn’s test revealed highly significant ( p < 0.001) differences for all categories save between the diabetic and poorly-controlled groups, which were not significant.