A two-way ANOVA indicated highly significant effects of salinity stress ( p < 0.001), EXc ( p < 0.001), EXd ( p < 0.001), and their interactions ( p < 0.001) ( Figure 3 ).
← all phrases
“highly significant”
Sighted at
p=0.09
In the literature
Furthermore, the linear relationship between NLR and dNLR was highly significant {Spearman’s correlation coefficient (rho): 0.964 ( p < 0.001)}.
In the later time window (700–900 ms), grammaticality yielded a highly significant main effect, F (1, 68) = 57.68, p <.001, η p 2 = .459, and interacted with electrode, F (24, 1632) = 30.14, p <.001, η p 2 = .307, ε = .196.
This association between the prevalence of COVID-19 patients requiring hospitalization and the age group increase was observed to be highly significant statistically (p < 0.001).
Highly significant inverse correlations ( p < 0.001) were found between the serum levels of VB 12 and the serum MMA and plasma tHCY levels ( Figure 4 A).
The interaction was highly significant with F (22,4609) = 3.638, p < 0.001, for digits and with F (22,4268) = 3.627, p < 0.001, for letters, respectively, which demonstrates that the age-related trajectory differed across colors.
The mean difference of PI values at later appointments with respect to baseline value showed a highly significant increase ( P < 0.001).
The test showed a highly significant result, with a χ 2 value of 2580.45 ( p <0.001), confirming that the correlations between items were sufficiently large for principal component analysis, thereby validating the factorability of the correlation matrix.
The Survey Day variable was highly significant ( p <0.001, edf values of 8.20 and 7.59 for MARU 1 and MARU 2, respectively) for both MARUs, with multi-modal seasonal distributions; there was also significant diel variation ( p <0.01, edf values of 3.15 and 3.64 for MARU 1 and MARU 2, respectively) for both MARUs, with peak singing activity during the night (see Figure S3 , for estimated smoothers for Survey Day and Hour).
These values showed a highly significant difference in epidermal thickness (Kruskal-Wallis test, χ 2 = 78.944, df = 4, p < 0.001; Fig. 4 A).
Thirty-eight of the 46 samples (83%) that expressed CXCR4 also expressed HIF-1α ( Figure 4B ), and this association was highly significant (p<0.001, Spearman's rank correlation).
Similarly, there was a highly significant difference in the time until the next fever spike (F (2,131)=15.66, p<0.001).
For women in the older subgroup (median age > 48 years), the quantile regression coefficient for metabolic syndrome status on right amygdala volume was highly significant (β = −9.41 × 10 −5 , p < 0.001).
The Omnibus test was highly significant ( p < 0.001), and the model’s overall classification accuracy was 84.8%.
For highly significant results, p -values less than 0.001 were uniformly reported as p < 0.001.
In case of six measurements— IMaF, PMaF, SMaC, IMaC, BMaC and IMeF, the gender differences were found to be very highly significant ( P < 0.001).
2019 was 39% for consultations (from 37,590 to 22,908) and 49% for new referrals (from 4,490 to 2,271), with a highly significant median difference for both ( p < 0.001) ( Fig. 4 A,B).
The KMO coefficient was found to be 0.87, the chi-square value for Bartlett's test was highly significant (p < .001), and the data were suitable and sufficient for the factor analysis.
Comparing the accuracies of the four participants to the combined accuracies of their permuted data yielded a highly significant difference at the group level ( t = −5.0, p < 0.001).
This difference was highly significant ( P < 0.001).
A one-way repeated measures ANOVA revealed a highly significant main effect of language on this measure, F (2, 94) = 64.3, p < 0.001, η 2 = 0.449.
The difference in SCC was highly significant ( P < 0.001) between normal, sub-clinical mastitis, and pasteurized milk.
The effect was highly significant on days 3 and 4 (P < 0.001) in IRJ 200 and 400 mg/kg treatment groups as compared to the respective time periods in the OKA group (P < 0.01 and P < 0.001).
The difference between the 2 groups for anti-HAV IgM positivity was highly significant ( P < .001).
The sex differences in the correlation coefficient (r) for both systems are highly significant, as evidenced by the following statistical results: AT (Fisher’s Z = -4.29, p < 0.001) and PM (Fisher’s Z = 13.65, p < 0.001).