Barely Significant

Excerpts

514,629 sentences

nominally significantp = 2.15 × 10 –70.0× alphagold
Although they did not survive false discovery rate correction (FDR) for multiple testing (Additional file 1 : Table S3), the nominally significant pairwise comparisons showed enrichment for π c differences related to hematological and metabolic traits (hematological fold-enrichment = 4.45, p = 2.15 × 10 –7 ; metabolic fold-enrichment = 4.05, p = 4.01 × 10 –6 ).
borderline significantP = 2.25 × 10 −70.0× alphagold
Meta-analysis of SNPs common to all four GWAS ( N = 6661818 and N = 6496414 for all AML and cytogenetically normal AML, respectively) also revealed additional borderline significant susceptibility loci at 1p31.1 (rs10789158, CACHD1 , P = 2.25 × 10 −7 ) for all AML and at 7q33 (rs17773014, AKR1B1 , P = 4.09 × 10 −7 ) for cytogenetically normal AML, both with consistent direction and magnitude of effect across all four studies (Figs. 1 and 2 ).
close to significancep = 2.3e-70.0× alpha
Another SNP, rs12955302, was close to significance in the SIgAD meta-analysis (p = 2.3e-7) before reaching it in the cFDR analysis. rs12955302 is located in an intron of PTPN2 , an immunologically salient gene, and is associated with a range of IMDs including Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis [ 121 ], T1D [ 62 ], and coeliac disease [ 152 ].
highly significantp = 2.36 × 10 −70.0× alphaqualifiedgold
One-way ANOVA confirmed a highly significant effect of drying method on TAC (F(3,8) = 148.6, p = 2.36 × 10 −7 ), and Tukey’s HSD test classified the methods into three distinct groups: freeze drying (a), oven/sun drying (b), and vacuum drying (c).
highly significantp = 2.5 × 10 -70.0× alphaqualifiedgold
Differences in rapidity and severity of systemic signs An ANOVA analysis of the differences among the strains with respect to the rapidity of the development of the first signs of systemic disease produced extremely highly significant results: p = 2.5 × 10 -7 .