However, when all time points were pooled, the cumulative incidence of bleeding was substantially higher in the enoxaparin group (23.3%) compared to the fondaparinux group (6.9%), and this difference was highly significant (χ2=8.02, p=0.002).
Excerpts
showed a trendp = 0.002
Fluid therapy with Plasmalyte-148 showed a trend toward faster DKA resolution at 24 hours (69% vs. 36%; OR 4.24, 95% CI 1.68-10.72; p = 0.002) compared to sodium chloride, though the difference at 48 hours was not statistically significant [ 15 ].
The association was highly significant (χ2 = 12.458 (df = 2), p = 0.002).
Furthermore, an elevated white blood cell (WBC) count demonstrated a highly significant association with appendicitis (p = 0.002), occurring in 18.6% of appendicitis cases versus 33.3% of non-appendicitis cases.
The gender check indicated a highly significant difference in wound infection in the male patients following fistulotomy with marsupialization procedure (10.1%) and conventional fistulectomy (24.1%) (p=0.002).
The increase from a mean of 28 ± 16 to 82 ± 20 was highly significant (p=0.00265, paired t-test).
The interaction between the instrument and the wound length was highly significant (p = 0.003).
Results Ischemic stroke was the primary stroke experienced by patients with diabetes (94.3%), which is highly significant and associated with an increased risk of previous recurrent ischemic stroke (55.2%; P=0.003, <0.001, respectively).
In the NC-FET group, the OR for clinical pregnancy following HRT-FET cycles was 1.47, 95%CI 1.24-1.75, and it was highly significant (P-value =0.003).
In CAD, the incidence of triple vessel disease was marked in diabetic patients with a strongly significant difference from non-diabetic patients (p<0.001, D=54.5%, N-D=29.7%) while for single vessel disease, the incidence was greater in non-diabetic patients with a slightly significant difference from the diabetic group (p=0.003, D=18.8%, N-D=33.9%).
AA amyloidosis showed significantly better survival (90.9%, one death in 11 patients) than AL amyloidosis (14.3%, six deaths in seven patients), yielding a highly significant difference (p = 0.0033).
The association between symptom duration and outcome was highly significant (χ2 = 11.18; df = 2; p = 0.0037), as demonstrated in Table 6 .
The p-value (calculated by using the Chi-squared test and taking controls as a reference) for each study group was highly significant for type II (PCOD) anovulatory disorder (p < 0.0038) and type III anovulatory disorder (p < 0.0058).
Sodium showed an increasing trend in group 1 at T2 (p = 0.004), T3 (p = 0.002), and T4 (p = 0.011), which was statistically significant.
Similarly, nationality had a highly significant association with HCV infection (p=0.004).
This is in accordance with our results where a highly significant relationship was found among patients with pterygia and an experience of sunlight exposure during daily activities (χ2 = 8.26; p = 0.004) [ 25 ].
The study also revealed a highly significant association (p < 0.004) between the level of education and participants' knowledge levels.
Our results indicate a clear trend of decreasing adherence with increasing age (p = 0.004, r = -0.195).
This between-group difference was highly significant (p = 0.004) (Table 3 ).
Notably, the presence of neuropathy emerged as a highly significant predictor of ulcer development, with an AOR of 4.317 (p = 0.004).
The statistical analysis showed a highly significant p-value <0.005 (Figures 1 - 3 ).
The study of abdominal CT showed that liver span was highly significant (t = 2.91 and p = 0.005) in non-fatty liver.
There was a highly significant association between laryngotracheobronchoscopic findings and the need for tracheostomy (p = 0.005).
This study was stopped earlier than planned by the ethics review committee due to the highly significant improvement in the two-year local-regional control (LRC) of the NRT group vs. photon group (67% vs. 17%, p<0.005) and a trend toward improved survival (62% vs. 25%, p=0.1) [ 1 ].
Higher prevalence of anemia was observed among overweight participants with 10 out of 26 (38.5%) subjects compared to obese with two out of eight (25.0%) and normal weight 21 out of 172 (12.2%); this difference was highly significant ( P = 0.005).