Excerpts

There was a highly significant difference between the prolongations of PT and PTT in DF ( P < 0.000).

The difference between mean GY with two, one and zero desirable alleles was highly significant (r 2 = 0.40; p ≤ 0.000).

In the rural area a decreasing trend was shown from 2012 to 2019 ( p < 0.00).

en that academic success is related to the teacher's pedagogical skills and the student's motivation to assimilate new knowledge. 19 According to Table 2 , the results suggest that in comparing frequencies of the levels of perception of success pedagogy for the feedback dimension, there are highly significant differences (p = 0.000, <0.05). 85% of undergraduate students scored in the high level for feedback, while 53.3% of postgraduate university students scored in the medium level.

Regarding the comparison between control and lavender oil massage groups, there were highly significant differences between the two groups, with p = 0.00.

A Highly significant association was observed among CPI and duration of intake of OCP (P=0.000) which shows that more the duration of OC intake, poorer is the periodontal health of the subjects.

The moderate level evidence suggested that there was a near-significant difference with more patients reporting tolerance in the LRD group (RR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.02–1.11; P = 0.00).

In contrast, computer skills showed a highly significant relationship (p-value = 0.000), indicating that better computer skills are strongly associated with greater PU.

The neurological recovery was highly significant ( p =0.000 using chi-square test with Yates' correction).

With regard to the number of years of schooling, when this variable was categorized into four education levels, there was a clear trend towards a better education level in the group of women diagnosed as having PCOS (p = 0.00) (Table 3 ).

Results indicated that whilst sex [χ 2 (1) = 1.368, p = 0.242] did not predict pose orientation, selfie type proved a highly significant predictor [χ 2 (1) = 14.061, p = 0.000].

**, highly significant ( P < 0.0l).

A highly significant difference (P = 0.000) was found in the total knowledge score between the participants with a dental degree and those with other qualifications (Table 4 ).

The factor analysis of the questionnaires was performed with Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin test, which was found to be highly significant ( P <0.000) and reliable (0.891).

Through a univariate analysis, this issue—“ is there water? how is it available? ” showed a highly significant difference ( p = 0.000) (see Table S1 in the Supplementary Materials ) between markets.

Spearman correlation showed that there was an extremely significant linear relationship (r=0.16, 95% CI=2.41–13.44, P <0.000) was observed between number of drugs taken and ADRs.

Differences in these network attributes tested by two‐way analysis of variance (ANOVA) at 0.05 significance level were highly significant ( p = .000; Table 3 ). 3.2.

This visual suggestion of publication bias was strongly corroborated by statistical testing, as Egger’s regression test was highly significant (z = 5.597, p = 0.000).

High translucency lithium disilicate showed highest direct transmittance values which were statistically highly significant ( P =.000)( Table 2 ).

This difference is highly significant ( P = 0 for >85–90% ID and 2.3 × 10 –44 for >80–85% ID, Fisher's test and FDR correction).

According to this t -test, the difference between the PC1 scores for the cached points and the kill/camp points is highly significant ( t = −10.82, df = 120, p <0.000).

The ROC derived from the prediction model yielded an area under the curve of 0.70, slightly higher than the ROC of the 10th percentile cut-off. Discussion The association between blink rate and DIP and UPDRS score in patients with SMI is highly significant ( p < 0.000).

There was a weakly significant negative correlation between desire and all items of the MRS (psychological [ r = −0.26, P = .000], somatic [ r = −0.21, P = .000], and urogenital [ r = −0.19, P = .001]), between arousal and all items of the MRS (psychological [ r = −0.26, P = .000], somatic [ r = −0.30, P = .000], and urogenital

This defined 10 haplotypes, six of which were associated with low ToxB sensitivity (the ‘group 1’ haplotypes: 1.1 to 1.6) and four with high sensitivity (the ‘group 2’ haplotypes: 2.1 to 2.4), with the differences in ToxB sensitivity between these two haplotype groups found to be highly significant (Welch two sample t -test: t = 25.5, P ~ 0) (Supplementary Figure 1).

These reductions were highly significant (p<0.00).