Barely Significant

Excerpts

514,629 sentences

highly significantp = 3.88×10 −110.0× alphaqualifiedgold
After adjusting for LYZ expression, the trans association observed with rs317657 were reduced, but remained highly significant, p = 3.88×10 −11 , p = 1.15×10 −7 , p = 2.52×10 −6 , p = 1.65×10 −10 , p = 7.16×10 −29 , p = 2.44×10 −5 , p = 8.23×10 −28 , p = 1.81×10 −13 , p = 5.66×10 −10 for CNTN6 , CTRC , COPZ2 , KRT9 , LRRFIP1 , NOD1 , PCDHA6 , ST5 and TRAF3IP2 , respectively.
highly significantP <3.9 × 10 -110.0× alphaqualifiedgold
For example, Lu and Cantor describe a method that allows for sex-specific associations, resulting in highly significant findings at the ryanodine receptor 2 locus ( P <3.9 × 10 -11 ) in a multiplex autism dataset [ 8 ].
highly significantp=3.9×10−110.0× alphaqualifiedgold
72 Several studies demonstrated a strong association between DISH and MS: Mader et al confirmed this based on WHO criteria, 73 Vezyroglou et al reported metabolic abnormalities in 70% of DISH patients versus 45% of controls (p<0.0001) 74 and the AGES-Reykjavik Study found a highly significant association (OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.69 to 2.64, p=3.9×10−11), mainly driven by BMI and blood glucose criteria. 75 Association with excess body weight and body fat composition DISH is strongly linked to excess body weight, particularly central obesity measured by waist circumference. 6 9 54 56 60
highly significantp = 3.93 × 10−110.0× alphaqualifiedgold
The two-way ANOVA (response: OD at 517 nm; factors: Treatment and Experiment) indicates a highly significant main effect of Treatment (F 2 ,12 = 319.43, p = 3.93 × 10−11), demonstrating that absorbance differs markedly among the control, thyme oil, and cinnamon oil groups.
highly significantp = 4.36 × 10 −110.0× alphaqualifiedgold
Using STRINGv11.0 program with the highest confidence interaction score (CIS) of 0.9, processing the 119 genes yielded a protein–protein interaction network of 70 genes, which was found to be highly significant based on hypergeometric test with Benjamini–Hochberg correction ( p = 4.36 × 10 −11 ) ( Figure 2 a).
highly significantp = 4.93 x 10 −110.0× alphaqualifiedgold
When comparing the frequency of observed de novo variation to the expected background frequency of de novo missense or loss-of-function variation in RALA (6.16 x 10 −6 per chromosome) [ 17 ], we find a highly significant enrichment for de novo variants in affected probands (8 observed de novo variants in 32172 screened alleles vs. 0.198 expected, Exact Binomial test p = 4.93 x 10 −11 ).