“highly significant”

Bartlett’s test was highly significant in all cases (All: χ 2 = 3806, p < 0.001; North: χ 2 = 1370, p < 0.001; Mid: χ 2 = 1874, p < 0.001; South: χ 2 = 1653, p < 0.001), confirming that correlations were sufficient for factor extraction.

The negative relationship between GC content and mutation rate was supported by a highly significant correlation between the observed mutation rate and GC content across the genome ( R 2 = 0.831, P < 0.001) (see Supplemental Fig.

There was a highly significant positive correlation between task cycle and performance (ρ = 0.924, p < 0.001) ( S2 Dataset ).

Modules that displayed a highly significant degree of overlap (p < 0.001) were considered to be ‘consensus’ modules.

baseline), was highly significant and had large effect size for all presentation and stimulus variable blocks; for all comparisons, p < .001 and effect size Cohen’s d >0.7 (7/36 cases d >0.5), except for the case of spatial presentation, circle size, where p < .02 ( d = 0.35) for SEEN = mean vs.

In Group A (36.5 ± 11.2 sec), it took far less time to establish a functional airway compared to Group B (73.667 ± 21.2 sec), with a highly significant p-value of <0.001.

A p -value < 0.05 indicates statistical significance, a p -value < 0.01 indicates a highly significant result, and a p -value < 0.001 indicates an extremely significant result.

Using a combined probability Fisher test in a meta-analysis over all data sets, we found a highly significant interaction between chemotherapy type received and HOTAIR expression in dictating response to treatment ( P < 0.001; Table 2 ), which was retained in multivariate analysis ( P = 0.008; Table 2 ).

Earliest successful learning could be shown for groups (s) and (D-6), with highly significant differences ( p < 0.001) in their RT reduction (SD) between the first and second block of practice with 143.5 (15.0) ms and 227.5 (53.1) ms, respectively.

Furthermore, we observed a highly significant correlation between the level of GATA6 and Venus protein levels in PrE cells at both E3.5 ( r = 0.6581, p < 0.001) and E4.5 ( r = 0.3257, p < 0.001; Fig. 2d ).

Interaction term between number of repeated PZQ treatments and chemical environment exposure A highly significant interaction effect ( p < 0.001) was found between repeated PZQ treatments and the use of toxic chemicals.

For the pre-pandemic baseline (2019), the variance between regions was highly significant [ F (2, 28) = 14.31, p < 0.001].

Early Responders reached peak oxygenation fastest (mean, 6.3 h), compared with Delayed Responders (13.2 h) and Non-Responders (9.9 h), representing a highly significant difference ( p < 0.001).

After concluding the program, there was a highly significant decrease in the Hwabyung symptom scale between baseline and week 9 ( p = 0.001).

All the differences between men and women were highly significant ( P < 0.001) even when the data were related to body mass ( P max⁡ · BM −1 , F 0 · BM −1 , and F 0 · BM −0.67 ).

Species identity effects on stand productivity and biomass partitioning Comparing the pot-level productivity of the 16 (moist treatment) or 11 species combinations (dry treatment) with Two-way ANOVA revealed highly significant effects of the species combination [F (15, 169) = 3.75, p < 0.001] and of the moisture treatment [ F (1, 183) = 38.28, p < 0.001] on RGR total .

Gallbladder wall thickness showed minimal variation between groups and remained within normal limits Gallbladder stones were significantly more prevalent in SCA patients (20.0%) compared to controls (7.5%), with a highly significant chi-square result ( p < 0.001).

78 (22%) out of 350 cases showed positive ANO1 expression and a highly significant correlation was found when comparing ANO1 immunostaining detected with both antibodies (Spearman’s rho 0.917, P < 0.001).

The differences among the groups were highly significant ( P < 0.001).

Despite highly significant main effect of patients’ subtypes on MMSE scale ( F [1, 72] =17.17, P <0.001), no main effects of follow-up exams or an interaction were obtained (all P >0.1).

18.5) - a highly significant difference (p<0.001).

The analysis showed a marginally significant group effect (Wald χ 2 = 3.820, P = 0.051), a highly significant time effect (Wald χ 2 = 760.909, P < 0.001), and no significant group-by-time interaction (Wald χ 2 = 2.325, P = 0.676).

These associations remained highly significant ( P < 0.001 for all) through sequential multivariate adjustment: first for other blood parameters (Model 1), then additionally for demographics (Model 2), comorbidities (Model 3), and finally angiographic severity (Model 4).

The multiple regression model for uptake was highly significant ( P <.001), with significant positive associations for intentions regarding physical activity (B=1.86, 95% CI 0.74-2.97; P =.001) and healthy nutrition (B=2.22, 95% CI 1.00-3.44; P <.001), as well as a significant negative association for patient activation (B=−3.20, 95% CI −4.95 to −1.46; P <.001).

A highly significant negative correlation was found between those two values (r= − 0.812, p < 0.001).