Barely Significant

Excerpts

514,629 sentences

highly significantP<0.00010.0× alphaqualifiedgold
Furthermore, highly significant correlations were observed for IKZF1 probesets plotted against the BTK probeset: 205038_at (Correlation Coefficent = 0.27, T-value = 9.24, P<0.0001), 205039_s_at (Correlation Coefficent = 0.19, T-value = 6.47, P<0.0001) and 216901_s_at (Correlation Coefficent = 0.19, T-value = 6.37, P<0.0001) ( Fig.
highly significantP < 0.00010.0× alphaqualifiedgold
71 Analysis of the HPS also assessed simvastatin efficacy in subjects with and without diabetes and showed an effect consistent with the full cohort; 72 that is, simvastatin produced highly significant reductions (22%; P < 0.0001) in the first event rate for major coronary events, strokes, and revascularizations in subjects with type 2 diabetes.
highly significantP <10 -40.0× alphaqualifiedgold
With the exclusion of the initial positive report, which tends to suggest a stronger genetic effect (winner's curse) than those in subsequent studies [ 9 - 11 , 16 ], the cumulative OR decreased slightly but remained highly significant ( P <10 -4 ) with no significant heterogeneity ( P heterogeneity = 0.47, I 2 = 0%) (see Figure 3 caption).
highly significantp < 0.00010.0× alphaqualifiedgold
The model also showed significant correlations with clinical markers, including faecal calprotectin ( r s = 0.50), C-reactive protein (CRP; r s = 0.45) and Physician Global Assessment ( r s = 0.45), all of which were highly significant ( p < 0.0001), supporting the clinical validity of UC-SCALE. 23 Aside of CNNs, other computational methods have been employed to detect mucosal inflammation.
highly significantp <0.00010.0× alphaqualifiedgold
A step-wise regression model of response surface for cheese sensory score (Y) was calculated according to following equation: Y=84+A+0.88B−1.63C+3.50AB−3.00AC+5.25BC−8.38A 2 −2.13B 2 −2.13C 2 In the quadratic regression model, the ANOVA analysis ( Table 5 ) revealed that the second-order response surface model was highly significant ( p <0.0001), which indicated that the model was appropriate.
extremely significantP < 0.00010.0× alphaqualified
Statistically, extremely significant difference was observed between the prewash and postwash at RT sperm DNA fragmentation mean percentage values ( t = 5.169, P < 0.0001), similarly statistically significant difference was observed between the prewash and postwash at 37°C sperm DNA fragmentation mean percentage values ( t = 5.090, P < 0.0001).