“highly significant”

Patients with ICM showed a highly significant increase in median CILP1 ( p < 0.001; Figure S1a ) and NT‐proBNP ( p < 0.001; Figure S1b ) concentration as compared to the controls.

Baseline serum retinol was also a highly significant predictor of change (p < 0.001).

All of these results were highly significant (p < 0.001), indicating that the observed performances were extremely unlikely to have occurred by chance.

The Chi-square test results related to this contention as highly significant ( P < 0.001).

Results: The comparative analysis showed highly significant difference of knowledge and attitude score between general dental practitioners and non-orthodontic specialties (Student’s t -test, P < 0.001).

However, in a post hoc analysis, we calculated our graph theory measures of interest from both 10 and 5 min of healthy control hdEEG data and found large and highly significant correlations between recording lengths for all measures (all r ≥ 0.800, all P < 0.001; see ‘Data Repository’), giving us confidence in the robustness of graph theory metrics in 5-min hdEEG recordings.

Donepezil treatment yielded a highly significant therapeutic effect ( p < 0.001) as compared with the AD group.

Statistical significance was interpreted as highly significant at P ≤ 0.001.

The increase became highly significant for both proprioceptive and postural controls ( p < 0.001).

For the 2x2 ANCOVA model addressing differential effects during the two stimulation blocks, the baseline covariate was highly significant, F (1,25) = 100.95, p <.001, η p 2 = 0.80.

Differences were considered non-significant (ns) for p -values > 0.05 (marked as “ns”), significant for p -values < 0.05 (marked as *), highly significant for p -values < 0.01 (marked as **), and extremely significant for p -values < 0.001 (marked as ***), and p -values < 0.0001 (marked as ****), respectively. 3.

With regards to the variability of factor B (cultivar), all the differences between the variables were highly significant ( p ≤ 0.001).

The dbRDA model including all non-collinear predictors explained 65% of the variation in community structure (adjusted R 2 = 0.65) and was highly significant based on permutation tests (F = 6.40, p = 0.001).

The mean reduction of 4.60 ± 1.39 in the intervention group was highly significant relative to placebo (0.73 ± 1.38; p < 0.001).

From the cross-lagged path diagram, it can be seen that the autoregressive coefficients for negative emotions and health-promoting behaviors at the two measurement time points were stable and highly significant, with β = 0.43 ( P < 0.001) and β = 0.36 ( P < 0.001), respectively.

A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant (p-value <0.05 (statistically significant), p-value <0.01 (highly significant), p-value <0.001 (very highly significant)).

Results Patients with a T4 tumor who received postoperative chemotherapy had a highly significant survival benefit in respect of overall survival ( p < 0.001) and recurrence-free survival ( p = 0.008).

A comparison pooled across all locations shows a highly significant advantage for average-image targets (Wilcoxon signed-rank test, two-tailed: W = 88, p < .001).

Additional analysis of the data using two-sample t tests for each of the four census years (see Section 3), also confirmed a highly significant ( p < 0.001) difference between the asset wealth (SEP) levels of the two sets of households that was constant for the entire period.

We observed a highly significant positive correlation of recombination rates between the populations at the scale of 500-kb windows (Spearman’s rank correlation; rho = 0.931, P < 0.001; fig. 2 ; supplementary fig. 4 , Supplementary Material online).

In contrast, a highly significant three-way interaction was observed when the TMS was applied at the encoding phase (F 1,38 = 12.6, p = 0.001, η 2 p = 0.23) ( Figure 2 A, upper panels).

The overall regression model was highly significant according to ANOVA (p < 0.001), and the lack-of-fit test was non-significant (p > 0.05), confirming that the quadratic model adequately described the experimental data.

Predictors of quality of life and functioning In simple regression analysis, the broad definition of psychiatric complaints was a highly significant predictor of the Q-LES-Q score and the sum of 5 WSAS items, after covarying for age, gender, and education (p<0.001).

Over all years, the partial correlation (PC) of the net ecosystem exchange (NEE) of CO 2 and T air with ln( F CH 4 ) was high and positive in sign, while SHF was negatively correlated with ln(CH 4 ); all three PCs were highly significant ( p < 0.001).

The physical, psychological, social, and environmental domain score of QOL was found to be better in those with normal activities of daily living (ADL) and having no co-morbidity, and it was also found to be statistically highly significant on applying the “Student t-test” ( P < 0.001) [ Table 5 ].