Barely Significant
← all phrases

“highly significant”

132,143 sentences · 132,143 papers · 160,126 search hits before verification · confirmed specimen

Sighted at

p=0.09

Listed by Hankins (2013)

In the literature

highly significantP<10 −60.0× alphaqualifiedgold
Box 1 Umbrella review evidence rating by strength of association Convincing Highly significant associations (P<10 −6 ) Cases of n >1000 I 2 <50% 95% prediction intervals excluding the null value Largest study nominally significant (P<0.05) No evidence of small study effects No evidence of excess significance bias Highly suggestive Highly significant associations (P<10 −6 ) Cases n >1000 Larg
highly significantp < 0.0000010.0× alphaqualifiedgold
As shown in Figure 3 , while reduction in binding after treatment with unlabeled DARPin 9_29 was highly significant ( p < 0.000001), there was neither significant reduction in binding after receptor saturation using trastuzumab ( p > 0.05) nor any reduction in binding after treatment of SKOV-3 cells with cetuximab or bevacizumab.
highly significantp ≤ 1e-060.0× alphaqualifiedgold
In Supplementary Data 6 , the association of CHRM3 activation with “urinary contraction” (literature ID 364) contains the p value and ROC AUC for “Urinary retention” and is classified as highly significant ( p ≤ 1e-06), with distance 1 (i.e., the significant PT and starting PT are connected via 1 intermediate in the network, via the shared HT).
highly significantP < 10 −60.0× alphaqualifiedgold
By calculating the probability that 11 of 36 identified sites should fall in this binding region comprising 20 sites of a total 626 sites by chance ( Methods ), we found the concentration of sites identified as under positive selection in this region to be highly significant ( P < 10 −6 ).
Positive selection in dNTPase SAMHD1 throughout mammalian evolution.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A · 2019 · PMC6744909
highly significantP < 0.0000010.0× alphaqualifiedgold
Significant differences were observed between the SIDS and non-SIDS groups: the presence of thymic petechiae in SIDS (89.5%) compared with non-SIDS (47.7%) was highly significant ( P < 0.000001; OR 9.38 (CL 4.5 to 19.9), and their absence was more frequent in non-SIDS (52.3%) compared with SIDS cases (10.4%) ( P < 0.000001).