“highly significant”

For the HI, the interaction irrigation × mycorrhiza treatment was likewise highly significant (LMM: df = 2, X 2 = 15.72, p < .001).

Differences were considered as significant (* P < 0.05); very significant (** P < 0.01) and highly significant (*** P < 0.001).

The model confirmed a highly significant effect of storage time on Acceptability (χ 2 (6) = 30.6, p < 0.001).

At the 24-h treatment, a significant insecticide × developmental stage interaction was observed (χ 2 (6) = 83.28, p < 0.001), along with highly significant main effects of both insecticide (χ 2 (3) = 1285.60, p < 0.001) and developmental stage (χ 2 (2) = 54.54, p < 0.001).

Means and standard errors were calculated and results were considered statistically significant when p ≤ 0.05 and highly significant when at p ≤ 0.001.

Although highly significant ( p < 0.001) using the chi-square test, Cramer’s V showed that residence (V = 0.052–0.066) and maternal education (V = 0.041–0.044) were only weakly associated with anemia.

Moreover, the linear-by-linear association was highly significant (33.832, p < 0.001), demonstrating a clear ordinal trend: as clinical severity increased (according to the Olsen score), the severity of honeycomb pattern disruption also intensified.

The per capita HFCE also exhibited a highly significant negative relationship (−0.00009, p < 0.001), indicating that greater household consumption capacity substantially enhances national food security.

Capitol ( Figures 5A,C ), whereas the Xcc -responsive increase in these compounds was highly significant ( p < 0.001) ( Figures 5B,D ) and concurrent with the enhanced expression of proline synthesis-related genes ( P5CS2 and P5CR ) in cv.

Comparison between the baseline and the ninth month was found to be highly significant ( P = 0.001), suggesting that the mouth rinse has better results when used for a longer duration of time.

Correlation coefficients were highly significant and suggest a good quality of the model ( R 2 = 0.99; P < 0.001).

The overall improvement in the group was highly significant ( P < 0.001).

Results The result revealed highly significant differences ( P = 0.001) between group 1 and group 2 in DLC at 24th days of age.

A highly significant correlation was also found between TB and TSR ( P = 0.001).

Data stratification analysis revealed a highly significant correlation between CD44 hi /CD24 lo -ALDH1 hi tumors and DFS and OS ( p < 0.001) in patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

A similar pattern of results was found for the measure of avoidance latency, with a highly significant two-way interaction, F (12,164) = 3.0, p = .001, reflecting poorer acquisition curves in the 50 and 100 Hz groups relative to the 20 Hz and no stimulation groups ( Figure 2 , middle panel).

In the 100-item versions, highly significant inversion effects were evident on both our new tasks: Emotion-matching (upright: M = 77.59, SD = 7.64; inverted: M = 68.28, SD = 6.88; t (96) = 4.75, p <.001) and Emotion-labelling (upright: M = 83.10, SD = 6.87; inverted: M = 67.50, SD = 9.84; t (96) = 7.99, p <.001).

In the Functional Reach Test, there was no significant difference between the pretest values ( Z = −1.07 and p = 0.28), but there were a marginally significant difference between the groups at posttest 1 ( Z = −2.01 and p = 0.04) and a highly significant difference between the posttest 2 values ( Z = −3.40 and p < 0.001) with the experiment group performing better.

While the averages for “prison inmates” and “club practitioners” showed very different results for launched actions, kiais , and bows for “white belt” participants ( p = 0.062 for launched actions, p = 0.043 for kiais , p < 0.001 for bows; Table 4 ), “colored belt” participants had averages with highly significant differences ( p < 0.001 for launched actions and p < 0.001 for bows; Table 4 ).

In the kidney, correlations between enzymatic antioxidants were even stronger and highly significant: - SOD and CAT (r = 0.95; p < 0.001), - CAT and GPx (r = 0.90; p < 0.001), - SOD and GPx (r = 0.88; p = 0.001).

On the unseen 2024 cohort, the same model achieved 0.586 (0.468–0.695), an absolute decline of 0.338 that remained highly significant ( p < 0.001, 5000-label permutation test).

The results showed a highly significant difference, with a mean difference of 9.44 (t(2016) = 43.521, p < .001).

As expected, the difference was stronger for the EEGs with spikes ( t = 7.035; df = 24; P < 0.001), but also highly significant for EEGs without spikes ( t = 5.688; df = 24; P = 0.001).

The KMO measure of sampling adequacy was 0.636 and 0.609 on the two datasets, respectively, and Bartlett’s test of sphericity was highly significant ( p < 0.001), confirming that the sample size was adequate for the EFA.

RESULTS The mean of the ER for new and worn scaler tips was 8.22 ± 1.04 and 69.43 ± 10.06, respectively, and was statistically highly significant ( P < 0.001; confidence interval = 95%), when compared using an independent t -test.