“highly significant”

The results of Bartlett’s Test are highly significant ( p < 0.001) for both study areas, demonstrating that the correlation matrices significantly differ from identity matrices, thus validating the appropriateness of FA for each dataset.

The results indicated a highly significant improvement in RT during physical exercise periods compared to the baseline test ( P < 0.001).

Fire recovery strategy was highly significant ( P < 0.001), with post‐fire obligate reseeders being 85.7% amphistomatous and obligate resprouters 36.8% amphistomatous.

Statistical analysis indicates that this belt shows a highly significant widening trend with increasing annual precipitation ( R 2 = 0.724, p < 0.001, n = 13).

Moreover, the inter-group comparison showed a highly significant difference ( P =0.001) between the two groups. 2.

When comparing positions independently, the greatest group differences occurred in conditions P1 (eyes open and firm surface) and P3 (eyes closed and firm surface), both showing highly significant differences (p < 0.001) favoring the control group, with large effect sizes (d > 1.88) ( Figure 3 ).

The date of 50% canopy autumn senescence (JD 50 ) in the Swedish Central Collection of heirloom cultivars showed strong to very strong correlations between the 3 years ( r = 0.65, 0.70 and 0.86; Figure 2a ), and were all highly significant ( p < 0.001).

When DMFS was analyzed in the stage IIB-IIIA cohort specifically, results were highly significant for all three individual biomarkers as shown in Figure S5 ( P = .001, P = .017, and P = .001).

Paired samples t-tests revealed highly significant differences in MEP ( p = 0.001) and significant differences in FEV1/FVC ( p = 0.026) for the testosterone use and no testosterone use groups.

Additionally, there were elevated circulating levels of Elabela-21 and Elabela-11 in the overweight cases with recently developed T2DM and prediabetes more than in healthy controls with highly significant differences (P < 0.001).

This difference was highly significant ( P < 0.001), and the analysis further confirmed pleural effusion as a key independent predictor of the need for surgical intervention, with an OR of 11.679 (95% CI: 3.577–38.134, P < 0.001).

The vasopressor consumption in the bolus group was highly significant, with P < 0.001, as shown in Table 3 .

Classification into species related to p-distances When species were considered as classes of objects and used in a db-RDA for predicting the variability in the p-distances, the adjusted explained variation was 87.4%, relations being highly significant (test on all axes, pseudo-F = 205, p = 0.001; Fig S3 in S1 Supp orting Information ).

Standard ANOVA analysis revealed highly significant differences in mean values among groups, ***p < 0.001.

At the hematological level, all patients with low LMR presented lymphopenia, with a highly significant difference compared to those with high LMR (p < 0.001).

Both regression models demonstrated highly significant results ( p < 0.001), confirming that stem‐to‐femur ratio significantly influences both micromotion and stress shielding, but in opposite directions.

Demographics related to 30-day in-hospital mortality (Table 1 ) There was a highly significant difference between the ages of the initial survivors 60.5 (43.3, 74.8) and 30-day in-hospital deaths 78.5 (67.9, 85.3) ( p < 0.001).

Figure S1 shows the successful posterior predictive checks: the simulated data from the hybrid model reproduce the key features of our data indicated by the highly significant correlation between the real and simulated choice behavior (all r s ≥ 0.83 and p < 0.001).

An ANOVA analysis indeed indicated a highly significant main effect of congruency on the search performance (F 3,63 = 11.88, p < 0.001; η 2 = 0.36 - large effect size).

Statistical analysis using the chi-square test revealed these differences to be highly significant ( P < .001 for all pathogens), indicating a strong association between sample type and bacterial contamination.

Specifically, the mean learning gain for Risk Resist was 3.6 (SD 0.5), which was substantially higher than the mean of 2.0 (SD 0.5) for the traditional method, with a highly significant difference ( P <.001).

PSA density emerged as the strongest predictor for both endpoints, demonstrating a highly significant association ( p < 0.001) and the highest area under the curve (AUC) among all single-variable models.

A highly significant correlation (η2=0.198; P = 0.001) was also found between decreasing MoCA scores and pain at rest that required treatment on postoperative day T3.

Similarly, the mean Reliability Score of Group A (2.29 ± 1.21) was greater than that of Group B (1.72 ± 1.09), showing a highly significant difference (t(286) = 3.46, P < 0.001).

A marked improvement was observed in the second cycle, where documentation increased to 48 patients (90.6%), and this difference was highly significant (χ2 = 22.59, p < 0.001).