“extremely significant”

A p value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant (*), p < 0.01 highly significant (**), and p < 0.001 extremely significant (***).

A positive and extremely significant correlation was found between PCT and CRP in all three groups (p < 0.001).

The results show an extremely significant difference in programming learning approach ( t = 4.268, p < 0.001) and programming learning attitude ( t = 5.618, p < 0.001).

We found that the differences in the pretest were extremely significant [ t (63) = 31.40, p < 0.001] with respect to the social status.

P < 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant, P < 0.01 was highly significant, and P < 0.001 was extremely significant.

The results showed an extremely significant positive correlation between SAR and AbunR (Fig. 3a ; R 2 = 0.833, P < 0.001), suggesting that the population with higher ‘Space Accessibility’ would occupy more space at t 2 .

Results of both were statistically evaluated by two-tailed Student’s t-test and considered significant ( P < 0.05), highly significant ( P < 0.01), or extremely significant ( P < 0.001).

Boosting with VLPs resulted in increased antibody titers, with final antibody titers reaching extremely significant (p< 0.001) values over the negative control mice.

None of the blood biochemical parameters exhibited significant differences between the ZF0 and ZF1 groups compared with both the control groups ( Table S9 ). Only the cholesterol (CHOL) levels in the ZF1 group and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) levels demonstrated extremely significant differences compared with the DF1 group ( p < 0.001).

Table 3 shows that the low- and high-scoring groups had extremely significant differences in learning management skills ( t =−14.69, P <0.001).

Compared with the model group, the petroleum ether group has extremely significant difference ( p < 0.001), and the ethyl acetate group and the medicinal control group have significant difference ( p < 0.05).

Effect on serum creatinine, urea, uric acid and albumin Positive control (only lead acetate treated) group showed highly significant (P < 0.001) increase in serum creatinine, urea, uric acid and extremely significant (P < 0.001) reduction in albumin levels compared to negative control.

The differences in abundance among Bacteroidetes, Firmicutes, Chloroflexi, Gemmatimonadetes, Proteobacteria, Actinobacteria, and Acidobacteria were extremely significant ( P < 0.001) at the phylum level ( Figure 2F ), while at the genus level, the abundance differences among Pseudomonas , Ralstonia , Lechevalieria , Rhodanobacter , Rhodococcus , Bacillus , and Flavobacterium were extremely significant ( P < 0.001).

The apoptosis rate in the serum-free group was significantly higher than that in the normal control group and the difference was extremely significant (P<0.001).

The significance test analysis of the regression equation showed that the model was extremely significant ( p < 0.001), and the missing items were not significant ( p = 0.159 > 0.05).

Glutathione Reductase Levels (GR) An extremely significant (*** p < 0.001) fall occurred in GR in mice of group II in comparison to levels in control mice (Group I).

As there was an extremely significant negative relationship between soil silt content and soil sand content ( r = 0.998, p < 0.001; Figure S4 ), soil silt content was excluded in all data analyses.

Even though both formulations had the same type of time distribution (exponential), the distribution rate parameters differed in an extremely significant manner on the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test ( p < 0.001).

Differences were considered not significant at P > 0.05, statistically significant at P < 0.05, very significant at P < 0.01, and extremely significant at P < 0.001.

Consistently, there was an extremely significant increase in HbA1c% on comparing both T2DM+ATHR and T2DM-ATHR diabetic groups to the control group (P<0.001 and P<0.01 respectively).

These tests were considered not significant when p ≥ 0.05 (ns), significant when 0.01 ≤ p < 0.05 (*), very significant when 0.001 ≤ p < 0.01 (**), and extremely significant when 0.0001 ≤ p < 0.001 (***) or when p < 0.0001 (****).

The results show that the interaction term of independent variable and moderating variable has a significant effect on the increase of interpretation rate of model 3 (Δ F =14.989, p <0.001), and regression coefficient of the interaction term of teaching barrier and resilience is extremely significant ( β =−0.342, p <0.001), indicating that the teaching barrier has a very significant negative moderating effect on the relationship between resilience and mental health symptoms (see Table 4 ).

While CRP continued to function as a predictor, SII was incorporated into the model in the second step [OR 1.002 (95% CI 1.001–1.002)], SII was extremely significant [B = 0.002, SE = 0.000, Wald = 12.462, P < 0.001].

Differences are considered significant at a p < 0.05 significance level and marked with “*”, very significant with p < 0.01 are labeled “**” and extremely significant with p < 0.001 are labeled “***”.

When p was < 0.01, events were considered highly significant, p < 0.001 indicated extremely significant events.