“highly significant”

The FAB coefficient was negative and highly significant (β = −0.75, SE = 0.17, z = −4.55, p < 0.001), indicating that higher FAB scores were associated with decreased odds of MCI classification.

This is highly significant according to an exact binomial test ( p < 0.001).

Similarly, DAS28 scores showed a marked and highly significant reduction at both follow-up visits ( p < 0.001 for both timepoints).

One-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s HSD revealed highly significant differences among cooked groups for all parameters ( p < 0.001).

They also showed higher total stigma score (65.9 ± 9.8) than normal widows (35.8 ± 8.0) and snake-bite widows (40.1 ± 7.1) and this difference was highly significant ( P < 0.001).

Notably, while age was significant in univariate analysis, it was not significant in the multivariate model ( p = 0.133), whereas mFI-5 remained highly significant ( p < 0.001). 4.

One-way ANOVA ( Table 3 ) showed that scanner type had a highly significant effect on trueness (F(2,27) = 11.39, p < 0.001), with a large effect size (η 2 = 0.46), highlighting the strong influence of device choice on accuracy.

Sodium loss exhibited a positive and highly significant relationship with weight difference (T = 7.02; p -value < 0.001) and skin temperature (T = 7.07; p -value < 0.001) ( Table 3 ).

The dependence of the k-value by temperature was described by the Arrhenius equation; the treatment had a highly significant effect on the Ea ( p < 0.001), with the control group having a lower Ea (24 ± 2 kJ mol −1 ) than the prototype group (46 ± 1 kJ mol −1 ).

Measurements were significant when p<0.05 and highly significant when p<0.001.

As shown in Figure 5 B, VP-AsA treatment significantly inhibited POD activity, particularly during early storage (days 6 and 9), where the difference from CK was highly significant ( p < 0.001). 3.5.

The combination of moderate inter-rater agreement with highly significant group-level performance (mean accuracy 76.12%, p = 0.001) indicates that discriminative information is objectively present in the sonifications (as validated in Section 3.4 ) and perceptually accessible to human listeners, but that exploiting this information requires perceptual acuity that varies across individuals.

Results: The measurements of survival and mobility of epididymal sperm followed at 0, 24, 48 and 72 h after collection, revealed significant (p<0.05) to highly significant differences (p>0.001) according to time.

Threshold THI for fertility traits The parity (p<0.01) and period of calving (p<0.05) had significant effect on SP, but THI had highly significant effect (p<0.001) on all the fertility traits of Murrah buffaloes ( Table-2 ) The least square means of SP, PR and CR are presented in Table-3 .

The model’s pseudo-R 2 of 0.34 and highly significant likelihood ratio test ( p < 0.001) indicate a moderate ability to discriminate patients with and without reproducible field defects based on the included covariates.

All Cohen’s κ values were highly significant ( p < 0.001), indicating agreement well beyond chance.

In the RMS model, total RMS was not associated with BCVA (β ≈ 0.00 logMAR per μm, p = 0.997), whereas the time effect remained highly significant (β ≈ −0.97, p = 0.001).

In the CALLY analysis, the low-CALLY group had a markedly shorter median survival (20.1 months, 95% CI: 20.1–56.7) compared with the high-CALLY group (89.0 months, 95% CI: 89.0–111.3), with a highly significant difference (log-rank p < 0.001).

Considering all populations and all loci, a highly significant deviation from HWE was noted (χ 2 =151.6963, p<0.001).

Primary outcome analysis The primary analysis using a linear mixed-effects model (LMM), adjusting for baseline attachment number as a covariate, revealed a highly significant main effect of GROUP on the change in DIAGNOdent scores from baseline to 6 months (F [ 3 , 35 ] = 438.4, p < 0.001).

This represented a substantial reduction in grain size with the speed sintering procedure, and the difference was highly significant ( p < 0.001).

The result was highly significant ( p < 0.001), confirming that mean echogenicity values differ significantly across tissue types.

The log-rank test indicated a highly significant difference in survival distributions between the two groups ( p < .001).

Finally, we demonstrated a highly significant ( P < 0.001) association between immune checkpoint expression and TPCDS, with notable co-expression among immune checkpoints (Fig. 7 J).

Compared with the derivation set, there were highly significant differences across nearly all baseline variables ( p < 0.001), thereby underscoring the robustness and generalizability of the developed predictive model.