In contrast, we observed a clear and highly significant up-regulation of the Cd163 cluster (Fig. 1 e, Kruskal–Wallis, p = 9.847e−6; post hoc Dunn test, p < 0.01, Braak V–VI compared to Braak 0 and II or Braak III-IV versus Braak 0) in this cohort.
Excerpts
As shown in Figure 9A , EBNA2-wt activated the promoter by about 500-fold (p = 0.0000000016), while the activation by EBNA2-ΔRG was lower but still highly significant (p = 0.000009975). hnRNP K-wt or the 5RG-mutant alone exerted a small but significant activation on the promoter construct (p = 0.000173 and p = 0.00529, respectively), while co-expression of hnRNP K-wt enhanced the EBNA2-wt-mediated activation by up to three-fold (p = 0.001675).
A positive trend was observed especially during sailing sessions, with SpO2 increasing by 3% (M2 97%; Q = 8.97; p = 0.00001) compared to baseline.
One group was enriched 20–30-fold relative to the GST negative control, with highly significant P -values ( P < 1 × 10 −5 ).
The positive relationship between φ and geographical distance was statistically highly significant (Mantel test, 100000 randomisations, r = 0.375, P = 0.00001), also when corrected for beetle phenotype (Partial Mantel test, 100000 randomisations, r = 0.379, P = 0.00001; see Materials and Methods for comments regarding the value of r of the Mantel test).
The differences were found to be highly significant ( t -test, p < 0.00001).
The test for overall effect was highly significant (Z = 9.38, P < 0.00001).
3G was highly significant ( P < 10 − 5 , Fisher’s exact test).
Heterogeneity was negligible (I 2 = 0%), and the test for overall effect was highly significant (Z = 6.16, p < 0.00001) ( Figure 2 ). 3.10.
See the problem here? In the Bond and DePaulo (2006) meta-analysis, the 54% accuracy was greater than chance with a highly significant ( p < 0.00001) t of nearly 40.
The test for subgroup differences confirmed a highly significant difference between the results derived from these two study designs (I2 = 97.4%, p < 0.00001).
Interestingly, expression was limited to grade 2 and 3 DCIS with a highly significant interaction (p < 0.00001) between PPARγ and grade.
When implementing this bootstrapping approach, we find that the ability of the top genes to correctly order the cROIs is highly significant ( p < 0.00001).
GSEA further validated a highly significant enrichment of the angiogenesis gene set (p < 0.00001), with the enrichment score achieving its maximum among the top-ranked genes ( Fig. 5 N).
After quality control and differential analysis, we identified 298 highly significant DMSs (p ≤ 1E-5).
The next 2 genes (low density lipoprotein receptor ( LDLR ) and tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases metallopeptidase inhibitor 1 ( TIMP1 ) showed moderately significant upregulation (p < 1 × 10 −5 ) in gene expression between D20+ TGF-β and D20 samples, as detected by RNASeq analysis and a significant upregulation at D20+ TGF-β vs D20 by real-time PCR (Fig. 4H,I ).
Correlation of the results in two successive examinations, that is, the change from one examination to the next in each individual patient, showed a positive, highly significant association between aCNV and CFT (p<0.00001, r=0.690) ( figure 4A ).
The list of nominally significant CpGs ( p < 1 × 10 −5 ) sorted by their p-value for low and high audiometric frequencies are depicted.
The fixed-effects model reported a highly significant difference between the buffered and unbuffered solutions in terms of duration of onset of anesthesia (P = 0.00001, MD: −12.38, 95% CI: −17.64 to −7.13; Fig. 5 ). 7.
Therefore, there is a highly significant difference in the expression of functional GABA B receptors on VTA GABA neurons compared to VTA dopamine neurons ( P <0.00001, Fisher exact test), making this property the most reliable pharmacological difference between GABAergic and dopaminergic VTA populations.
In all cases, differences between gamete-specific loci and seedling-specific loci were highly significant ( P < 10 −5 , Tukey test using a generalized linear model with logit link).
The ICI and WI showed a strong and highly significant correlation (r = 0.53141, p < 0.00001).
6b and 6f ) is highly significant ( p = 10 −5 ).
Gender differences in normal individuals Figure 1 A shows that there are no significant differences in QRS-amplitude sum in the six limb-leads between males and females ( P = 0.78), but there are highly significant differences in QRS-amplitude sum from the six chest-leads, with values in females being lower ( P = 0.00001).
Note that whereas adenomyosis was excluded from the meta-analysis and the effect size (OR) estimate and its corresponding 95% CI boundary were higher than 1.00, I 2 statistic was 96%, and Chi 2 test was highly significant ( P ≤ 0.00001).