“highly significant”

Across all years, the Kruskal-Wallis test yielded highly significant results (p < 0.001), indicating significant differences in dengue incidence among the three categories.

Highly significant differences ( p < 0.001, two-tail t-Test; at 5% level of significance) was observed later after 36 h of incubation in Kuroshio and STG samples (Table 2 ).

Among these, food biomass exerted a highly significant positive effect ( β = 0.85 ± 0.14, 95% CI: 0.58 to 1.11, p < 0.001), while distance to roads had a significant negative effect ( β = −0.47 ± 0.07, 95% CI: −0.69 to −0.26, p < 0.001). 4.

First, analyzing the effects of history and environment at fixed immigration levels revealed that historical source, environmental medium, and their interaction all had highly significant effects on community composition variation across all three immigration treatments (control, higher, highest) and at both time points ( p = 0.001, Table 1 ).

Statistical comparisons revealed highly significant differences between AE patients and controls ( p < .001 for most subgroups), whereas differences between AE subgroups were not significant, suggesting a uniform elevation of this chemokine across AE phenotypes ( Figure 1 ).

In Figure 1 , the fit of the model was highly significant ( R 2 = 0.9541, p < 0.001).

The overall association was highly significant ( p < 0.001).

Repeated measures ANOVA revealed no significant differences between experienced and new hearing aid users (F(1,76) = 0.967, p = 0.329), but highly significant differences between intervention and control groups (F(1,76) = 93.46, p < 0.001), indicating substantial training effects on processing speed regardless of hearing aid experience.

Priming treatments showed highly significant effects ( p < 0.001) across all germination and emergence traits, indicating their dominant role in determining seed performance.

Chi-squared analysis revealed a highly significant ( P < 0.001) difference between total controls and treated groups.

The rolling group × PEG level interaction was also highly significant (P < 0.001) for strip length.

Statistical significance was defined as follows: p>0.05, not significant (ns); p<0.05, significant; p<0.01, highly significant; and p<0.001, extremely significant.

For the TNC‐pre model (Table 6 ), the intercept estimate was 6.544 (SE = 0.265), representing the mean TNC count in the BTC twin group and was highly significant ( t = 24.696, p < 0.001).

The interaction between AF and the Deep-minus-Surface score was highly significant, F(1, 1626) = 64.29, p < 0.001, indicating that the relationship between relative learning orientation and marks differed clearly by AF.

In comparison, there were highly significant and positive correlations between total P and MgCl 2 -P (r = 0.92, p < 0.001, Fig. 3a ) and HCl-P (r = 0.91, p < 0.001, Fig. 3d ) at high P levels (total P > 3.5 mg g −1 ).

The Mustadi RB and Baladi Yoga therapy provided highly significant ( P < 0.001) improvement in ability of putting small objects in a container by 14.3%, in throwing ball in all directions by 21.8%, in use of thumb and index finger by 10.99%, in retaining 2 one inches cubes by 19.04% and in folding paper and inserting it into envelope by 10.3%.

The effects were statistically highly significant ( P < 0.001).

Unadjusted analyses Analysis of the unadjusted correlation between antibiotic prophylaxis and the patient characteristics’ and operating technique variables demonstrated that there were highly significant differences across all variables between the patients who had and had not received antibiotic prophylaxis (in each case p < 0.001).

The ANOVA revealed highly significant individual differences ( p < 0.001) among the items explored by each animal, with partial eta squared ( η 2 p ) values ranging from 0.360 to 0.442, indicating large effect sizes ( η 2 p > 0.14).

At T 2 , the intervention group outperformed the control group by 5.561 points, with a highly significant difference ( P < 0.001).

In Tukey’s HSD comparisons against PP_Pristine, PP_Cycle10 produced a highly significant metabolic decrease (p < 0.001), and PP_30 min continuous yielded a highly significant metabolic increase (p < 0.001).

The following parameters exhibited highly significant results (p<0.001): MI-OP, IMPA, FMIA, L1-NB (linear, angular) and Interincisal Angle.

The intergroup differences for all sleep variables were highly significant (p < 0.001), underscoring the beneficial impact of nocturnal oxygen therapy on both objective and subjective sleep indices.

The correlation between CT thickness and postoperative thickness was highly significant (Spearman rho = 0.755, P < 0.001) (Fig. 1 ).

The logistic regression model was highly significant ( X 2 = 141.5, p < 0.001) and gave an AUC of 0.88 (95% CI [0.82–0.95], p < 0.001) ( Fig. 2 ).