Barely Significant
← all phrases

highly significant

132,143 sentences · 132,143 papers · 156,979 search hits before verification · confirmed specimen

Sighted at

p=0.09

Listed by Hankins (2013)

In the literature

highly significantP = 1.8 × 10 −200.0× alphaqualifiedgold
Depression was a highly significant ( P = 1.8 × 10 −20 ) risk factor for AF recurrence after CA (RR: 2.3, 95% CI: 1.75–2.9), supported by suggestive evidence. 39 The mechanism of this association is unclear; however, it has been suggested that depression may be associated with chronic inflammation and can increase sympathetic activit
highly significantp value=2.1 × 10 −200.0× alphaqualifiedgold
Because adipocytes are the predominant stromal cell type in mammary tissue, we also performed follow-up analyses using the S-PrediXcan subcutaneous fat model and discovered a highly significant ( p value=2.1 × 10 −20 ) association of ZNF703 with increased breast cancer risk in the four-fold larger BCAC/DRIVE dataset, consistent with the MiXcan stromal cell results in the DRIVE data only.
highly significantP = 2.25E-200.0× alphaqualifiedgold
There were highly significant differences in regional grey matter volumes, particularly of mid- and hindbrain structures, such as cerebellum (beta = −9.91E-04, T = −9.26, P = 2.25E-20), pons (beta = −5.63E-04, T = −6.23, P = 4.95E-10) and midbrain (beta = −4.00E-04, T = −5.15, P = 2.67E-07) in gout and high urate (Fig. 2 ).
highly significantp = 2.9 × 10 −200.0× alphaqualifiedgold
Highly significant differences were observed between the means of three variables—the Toronto sample had more PsA patients (93.0% vs. 58.3%, p = 2.9 × 10 −20 ), while the Michigan sample had a higher mean age (51.4 yrs vs. 46.0 yrs, p = 8.6 × 10 −7 ) and a higher percentage of patients with a family history of psoriasis (60.6% vs. 42.9 %, p = 4.5 × 10 −5 ).
highly significantp = 3.24 × 10 −200.0× alphaqualifiedgold
Statistical analysis using two-proportion z -tests on both median and maximum values (representing the most conservative estimate) confirmed that from training Day T3 onward, the reduction in “h–c–b” transitions was highly significant compared with baseline (median, T3 p = 3.24 × 10 −20 ; T4 p = 1.73 × 10 −12 ; maximum, T3 p = 3.17 × 10 −18 ; T4 p = 1.73 × 10 −12 ).
highly significantP = 5 × 10 −200.0× alphaqualifiedgold
In fact, we found a highly significant correlation ( R = 0.2 and P = 5 × 10 −20 ) between RNA accessibility and ribosome density around the translation start sites ( Fig. 4A ), and the peak correlation locates approximately 10 bases upstream of the translation start site, the 5′ position of the occupancy site of the first ribosome in yeast ( Ingolia et al. 2009 ).
highly significantp = 6.78 × 10 −200.0× alphaqualifiedgold
Statistically, Welch’s ANOVA showed highly significant group effects for SCD and SCA ( p = 6.78 × 10 −20 and 3.58 × 10 −30 ), with L.D. scaffolds exhibiting larger SCD, SCA, and CSPD values than their seaweeds (all p < 0.001), consistent with structural expansion following decellularization.
highly significantP = 9.31 x 10 -200.0× alphaqualifiedgold
The association signal was also highly significant when analysis was confined to B-cell ALL (combined OR = 1.73, 95% CI: 1.61 – 1.85; P = 9.31 x 10 -20 ; Table 1 , Supplementary Table 1 ). rs6944602 and rs6964823 which map to the 3’ UTR and intron 7 of IKZF1 (50,441,245 bps and 50,427,590 bps; Fig. 1 ; Supplementary Fig. 4 ), also displayed statistical support for an association at 7p12.2 at genome-wide threshold ( P = 6.02 x 10 -14 and 3.43 x 10 -15 respectively). rs4132601, rs6964823 and rs6944602 map to a 27.3kb block of linkage disequilibrium (LD).
highly significantP = 9.9 × 10 −200.0× alphaqualifiedgold
The associations with voice disturbance (string instrument players: OR = 1.44 (95% CI = 1.36–1.52), P = 4.6 × 10 −19 ; and keyboard players: OR = 1.58 (95% CI = 1.50–1.65, P = 2.9 × 10 −31 )) and other vocal cord‐related phenotypes (e.g., diseases of the larynx and the vocal cords) remained highly significant (string instrument players: OR = 1.42 (95% CI = 1.34–1.49), P = 9.9 × 10 −20 ; and keyboard players: OR = 1.54 (95% CI = 1.47–1.61), P = 3.2 × 10 −31 )), indicating that there are likely more individuals in the dataset who are vocalists but for whom this is not noted in their chart.