The second-order similarity (i.e., correlation between pairwise cosine similarity matrices) between the McRae norms and the CSLB norms is highly significant (Spearman rho; for all 415 items, rho = .624, p < .0001).
Excerpts
Single bean gum application decreased HPV viral load in untreated salivary samples 86–95% and results were highly significant ( p -value < 0.0001).
In addition, these remained highly significant after exclusion of outliers ( r = −0.525, p < 0.0001 and r = −0.507, p < 0.0001, respectively; Figure 2 b).
The consistent differences between males of different ecotypes, with stream males generally scoring higher on PC1, remained highly significant (F = 25.9093, P<0.0001, df = 1, 110).
However, repeating this analysis with every patient in the study population assigned a NF-κB score according to mutation status (which makes use of all study data) and relating this to affected bone numbers, the result was highly significant both when we included all patients (r = 0.277, p < 0.0001) and also when the two patients with A427D mutations were excluded (r = 0.244, p < 0.001) (data not shown). 3.4 Impact of mutations on UBA domain structure and dimerisation We next sought to understand the structural basis of the effects of the I424S and A427D mutants on SQSTM1's ubiquitin-binding function revealed in the pull-down assays ( Fig. 1 b), and in particular, given the close proximity of these mutations to the site affected by the previously characterised G425R mutant, whether common or distinct mechanisms are manifested.
This distribution of alternative and constitutive pG4 genes for each UTR context was found to be highly significant through permutation testing ( P value < 0.0001 for 5′ and 3′ UTRs).
Results were annotated as follows: p < 0.05 (*; significant), p < 0.001 (**; highly significant), and p < 0.0001 (***; very highly significant).
Interestingly, over 30% of our RA cohort displayed anti-IL-2/IRF5 Abs in a highly significant double positivity ( p < 0.0001) and a more frequent multiple seroreactivity was observed in RA patients compared to healthy controls (Table 1 ).
The interaction of intervention group and time point was highly significant in a two-way mixed ANOVA model (F(2, 28) = 13.38, p < 0.0001), with significant simple main effects for both intervention group (p = 0.026) and time (p < 0.0001) ( Fig. 5 c).
The model is expressed by the following equation: Y = 30.166 + 1.04125A − 1.26875B − 0.24C − 1.55AB − 0.2075AC + 0.4575BC − 2.168A 2 − 4.998B 2 − 2.7405C 2 Analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed that the quadratic model was highly significant (F-value = 675.07, p < 0.0001; Table 8 ).
Mc Neman concordance between tests P < 0.0001 and Kappa index gives us a highly significant concordance P < 0.0001.
The difference in ulcer healing at 8 weeks was statistically highly significant ( P = 0.0001).
Two-way ANOVA revealed a highly significant main effect of diabetic status on muscle volume (F(1,34) = 119.04, p < 0.0001), with diabetes accounting for 74.08% of the total variance.
( 0.0001 ) 0.38 ( 0.0004 ) − 0.02 ( 0.8372 ) − 0.16 ( 0.0829 ) − 0.31 ( 0.0001 ) ) ( a t − 3 c t − 3 p t − 3 r t − 3 ) The Portmanteau test for cross correlation of residuals, Durbin Watson tests, and the univariate model AR diagnostics were non-significant, while the R-squared for each series was highly significant (ranged from 0.44 to 0.87, p < 0.0001).
The most insightful factor was the baking process, which resulted in a highly significant reduction ( p < 0.0001) in a w for both ChC and ChLp when baked, with mean differences of 0.09805 and 0.1111, respectively, compared to the chontaduro gel ink.
The difference in rates of near/perfect incontinence between older and younger groups remained highly significant (75.58 versus 55.16 %, χ 2 = 47.658, p < 0.0001), as did the daytime ( p < 0.0001) and night-time ( p < 0.0001) incontinence rates.
Experimental results Protective effects of pre-administered anticholinergic and anticholinesterase drugs against different snake venoms This study investigated the protective effects and underlying mechanisms of anticholinergic and anticholinesterase drugs against different bungarotoxins and other neurotoxin-rich snake venoms, yielding the following key results ( Fig 1 ): For γ-bungarotoxin: Pre-administration of scopolamine and neostigmine methylsulfate conferred highly significant protective effects ( Fig 1A & 1B , p < 0.0001), whereas bethanechol chloride and pilocarpine hydrochloride showed no protective activity ( S1A Fig ).
Importantly, a diagnosis of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) was associated with a highly significant reduction in the risk of EBV reactivation (HR 0.10, CI 0.03–0.33; P =0.0001).
The estimation of the variance component showed a highly significant behavior ( p < 0.0001) of the genotypes and the genotype x environment interaction across all the environments.
Together with the highly significant differences (Two‐tailed paired t ‐test P < 0.0001; n = 65) in the average (±SD) counts of unique gene clusters obtained from complete versus complete plus partial gene catalogues ( Supplementary Data 1 ) suggests a strong effect of partial gene sequences on gene diversity, and in turn, gene discovery.
We tested the hypothesis of independence of these distributions and found it to be highly significant (t = −10.95, df = 642.86, p ≤ 0.0001).
This regression was highly significant (slope = 0.5002, intercept = −0.8805, R 2 = 0.5580, F statistic = 60.59, p < 0.0001; Figure 5F ).
Protection was dose dependent, and there was a highly significant correlation between circulating in vivo HI and MN antibody titers and mice survival (nonparametric Spearman correlation r = 0.9, P < .0001) ( Hohenadl et al., 2014 ) A RCT of patients hospitalized with severe A(H1N1)pdm09 virus infection in 5 hospitals in Hong Kong compared treatment with immune IVIG prepared from plasma of persons who had recovered from the disease against treatment with normal IVIG manufactured before 2009 ( Hung et al., 2013 ).
For the MGL-expressing HEK293-cells, we observed a highly significant (P<0.0001) specificity for GalNAc-BSA ( Figure 1D ).
As a result, the main effect of Devaluation was highly significant (F(2,20) = 68.0, p<0.0001).