“highly significant”

Notably, the absence of linalool and 6-methyl-5-hepten-2-one showed highly significant differences ( p < 0.001) in all models.

Analysis of variance (ANOVA, α = 0.05) showed that the linear regression was highly significant ( p < 0.001), as evidenced by the high F -values and the low p- values ( Table S1 ).

PERMANOVA analysis showed highly significant differences in the composition of fish assemblage (p = 0.001) for the factor Depth and pair-wise tests revealed that these differences were always significant except for the comparisons between the two deeper layers (101–150 vs 151–200; p = 0.241).

In the MIC cumulative logit models, a moderate but significant (p<0.01) decreasing time trend was observed for A, C, F, O and Sp (for MICs above 16 μg/ml), while a highly significant (p<0.001) increasing trend was obtained for the E data ( Table 2 ).

One-way ANOVA revealed highly significant differences in mean cell diameter among treatments ( P < 0.001), and Tukey’s HSD post hoc test showed that several osmolyte-supplemented groups were significantly different from the salt-stressed control (+).

This value was highly significant (p < 0.001).

The result showed the highly significant association between school absentees and severity of dysmenorrhea ( p < 0.001).

The concentration 8 mg/mL was highly significant (P < 0.001) on PBMC, while the concentrations of 10 mg/mL and 6 mg/mL were significant (P < 0.01 and P < 0.05 respectively).

Sleep and Arousals Including condition alone did not significantly improve model fit (χ 2 (3) =0.003, p =0.99) but the inclusion of sleep stage resulted in a highly significant improvement over the null model (χ 2 (2) = 962.46, p <0.001).

Adding the health variables (Model 2) reduced the difference in fills between the non-enrollees and LIS recipients by just over a quarter to −16.9, a difference that remained highly significant ( P < 0.001).

In contrast, [ 99 m Tc]Tc-HMPAO showed a highly significant reduction (*** p < 0.001) at both 3 h and 24 h compared to the reference standard.

Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin analysis yielded a high index of 0.941 and Bartlett’s test of sphericity was highly significant (χ 2 (136) = 8,313, P < 0.001), indicating suitability for factor analysis.

The model was highly significant, χ 2 (47, N =200)=129.49, P <0.001, at the same time the model explained 47.7% (Cox and Snell R 2) to 64.5% (Nagelkerke R 2) of the variance on AMR knowledge and was able to classify 86.5% of the cases.

The most significant overall change was observed at Week 15 (12 weeks post‐second injection), yielding a high t‐statistic of 4.150 and a highly significant p value of p = 0.001.

These differences among the stone composition groups were highly significant ( p < 0.001).

Large-scale trials by 14 , 15 , 24 , 25 reported highly significant increases in self-efficacy scores (P < 0.001).

The analysis result for the whole model was highly significant ( p < 0.001).

The GCS score of patients in the endoscopic group at admission was 8.02 ±2.01, while in the puncture group it was 6.10 ±2.13, with a highly significant difference ( p < 0.001).

After incubation for 72 h, a dose-dependent increase in ARPE-19-LGALS1 −/− cell proliferation was observed, which was most pronounced and highly significant following incubation with 100 ng/mL hr-galectin-1 (83.6 ± 2.3%; p < 0.001) when compared to untreated galectin-1-deficient ARPE-19 cells (65.8 ± 0.8%; Figure 3 B).

Friedman tests for detecting systematic differences in matched subjects’ observations, using a subject’s average clicks per treatment as the unit of observations, show that the differences across treatments are highly significant (p < 0.001).

The logarithmic relationships between lake size and WST are highly significant during spring, summer, and autumn ( p < 0.001) and exhibit strong explanatory power (R2 up to 0.74), whereas this relationship is much less significant for winter values, as indicated by markedly lower R2 values and reduced statistical significance.

Notably, the ability to comprehend package inserts exerted a highly significant influence on medication literacy (p<0.001).

We observed highly significant differences (all p < .001) for SBP 1 and SBP 4 (both cerebellar SBPs), SBP 7 (parietal pattern), SBP 8 (lateral occipital pattern), SBP 9 (frontal pattern), and SBP 12 (medial occipital pattern), which had the largest effect size (−1.34 95% CI: [−1.5, −1.18]), indicating that 22q11DS had lower GMV than controls in those covariation patterns (supplementary material Table S2 ).

There were highly significant effects for population (χ 2 = 1064.3, df = 2, p < 0.001), prey type (χ 2 = 1937.71, df = 6, p < 0.001), and their interaction (χ 2 = 192.01, df = 12, p < 0.001).

A highly significant difference was present if p ≤ 0.001.