Barely Significant

Excerpts

514,629 sentences

highly significantp < 0.00010.0× alphaqualifiedgold
As seen in Figure 3 A,B, there was a highly significant negative correlation (r = −0.304 and r = −0.335) ( p < 0.0001) between the serum VB 12 level and the serum MMA level ( Figure 3 A) or between the serum VB 12 level and the plasma tHCY level ( Figure 3 B) in a given patient, and the serum MMA level directly (r = 0.437) and significantly ( p < 0.0001) correlated with the plasma tHCY level in a given patient ( Figure 3 C). 2.3.
highly significantp -values < 0.00010.0× alphaqualifiedgold
There was a significant difference between farm and slaughterhouse samples, with farm samples showing higher IgG levels ( p = 0.0074) in pigs with a pleurisy score of 1, and the differences were highly significant, with p -values < 0.0001, indicating much higher IgG levels in farm samples compared to slaughterhouse samples in pigs classified with the most severe pleurisy scores of 3 and 4 ( Figure 2 ). 3.7.
highly significantp < 0.00010.0× alphaqualifiedgold
Using the same background subtraction procedure, a lifetime of 2.5 ± 0.03 ns was obtained for EGFR–eGFP in the presence of EGF and Grb2–mRFP. A Student’s t test revealed that the difference in apparent lifetimes (2.85 vs 2.50 ns) was highly significant ( p < 0.0001, standard error about the mean 0.03 ns, sample size = 50).
highly significantp = 0.00010.0× alphaqualifiedgold
Quantification of GS-IB4 and CD31 CNV area demonstrated a highly significant reduction in the median lesion area of 45.6 [27.1–59.4]% ( p = 0.0001) and 45.1 [24.3–60.2]% ( p = 0.0006), respectively, in 13-12AB-PEDF-injected eyes compared with S1-S2AB-AsRed-injected control eyes ( Figures 5 B–5D).
highly significantp < 0.00010.0× alphaqualifiedgold
Our analyses identified the following variables as highly significant: “mean age,” “number of age groups”, and “data reporting quality” (all p < 0.0001). “Setting,” “disease classification,” and “number of diseases in the classification” were significant (0.01 < p ≤ 0.03), and “data collection period” and “data source” were non-significant.
highly significantp < 0.00010.0× alphaqualifiedgold
Marble burying was strikingly increased by both treatments and two-way ANOVA revealed a highly significant effect of time (F = 49.16, df 1,47 p < 0.0001) and treatment (F = 12.67, df 2,47 p < 0.0001) and a significant time X treatment interaction (F = 12.67, df 2,47 p < 0.0001) (Fig. 6D ).