“highly significant”

Not surprisingly, the effect of motion direction was highly significant (t(17)=21, p<10 -5 ).

This difference was highly significant (Mann–Whitney U test, P < 10 −5 ).

Expression of the four genes was correlated with highly significant correlation between PPARG, LPL and CD36 ( r > 0.9; P < 0.00001), and moderately significantly correlation with FABP4 ( r > 0.6, P < 0.001).

This difference was highly significant ( P < 0.00001) in favor of endovascular coiling [ Figure 3a ].

The reduction in ulcer size from baseline to day 35 was statistically highly significant ( p < 0.00001).

At 0% the low α-diversity of phototrophs was highly significant to diversities at 20% (June) (t = −8.85, df = 12, p < 0.00001 ) and at 45% (December) intermittence (t = −8.4, df = 21, p < 0.00001 ) ( Table S5 ).

In regards to the restoration of a normal diet, 2 studies reported these data [ 3 , 40 ] and showed a highly significant difference between the FT and TC groups, in favor of the FT group (MD [CI 95%] = −1.87 [−2.30, −1.44]; P < 0.00001, I 2 = 1%, Fig. 5 B). 3.5.8 Morbidity and mortality rates All of the selected studies reported these outcomes.

The difference in the concordance of these 2 data sets was highly significant (p<0.00001).

Figure 7 a shows the relationship between LAI r and LAI-vc e by applying method (ii) with k r obtained by inverting Equation (7), which rendered highly significant statistical analysis ( Table 4 ) as expected ( R 2 = 0.94; b = 0.98; SEE = 0.71; RMSE = 0.15; p < 0.00001).

The chi-squared test yielded a value of 323.71 with four df, which indicated highly significant heterogeneity ( P < 0.00001), as demonstrated in the forest plot depicted in Figure 3 .

The similarity in prognostic group assignment was highly significant ( p <10 −5 by Chi-square test).

However, a meta-analysis (Sagarin et al., in press) that examined the sex difference across 45 independent samples that used continuous measures found a highly significant, theory-supportive average effect, g * = 0.258, p < .00001, demonstrating that the sex difference in jealousy is not an artifact of the forced-choice methodology.

LR was observed in 80% of patients with postoperative AL (4/5) while only 9% of patients without AL (12/130); the difference was highly significant (p = 0.00001).

Highly significant difference was also observed in staining intensities between low malignant cases and highly malignant cases (χ 2 test, P<0.00001).

Species Response Curve (SRC) The analysis clearly indicates highly significant differences ( p < 0.00001) for increased population variable (conservation status) in comparison with all other variables due to their maximum frequency as shown in Figure 2A .

Though the differences were small, particularly on the original task, they were highly significant (P < 10 −5 ).

They found a highly significant association (p<0.00001) which demonstrated that high VEGF was associated with microvascular proliferations and necrosis in glioma [ 22 ].

The correlation was 97.1% (67/69 cases), which was highly significant (Chi-square test, p < 0.00001).

All correlation coefficients between these two datasets were above 0.99 (Pearson’s r ) and highly significant with p < 1e-5.

Indeed, when analyzing original single-cell time series data from the study reported by Yamaguchi et al (2003) , we also find a substantial (about threefold) and highly significant reduction of relative amplitude upon TTX treatment ( P <0.00001; Mann–Whitney test, one-tailed; n =78 for untreated cells; n =185 for TTX-treated cells; not shown)—very different from the effects of MDL on relative amplitude.

The pooled results demonstrated a robust and highly significant survival benefit in patients diagnosed under Sepsis-3 criteria (OR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.39–0.57, P < 0.00001) ( Figure 6A ) and Sepsis-1/2 (OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.41–0.90, P = 0.0008) ( Figure 6C ).

A linear regression model between vehicle occupants’ death rate and seatbelt noncompliance in our published data was highly significant ( P <.00001) ( Figure 1 ).

The overall Repeated Measures ANOVA applied to compare the values of n i obtained for all three ant groups revealed a highly significant effect of the between-subject effect „group” ( F 2,117 = 27,297, P < 0.00001), a highly significant effect of the within-subject effect „time” ( F 9,1053 = 31.303, P < 0.00001), and a significant interaction „group” x „time” ( F 18,1053 = 1.721, P = 0.031).

In the three effect model, SNP rs1048943 (CYP1A1 G/A) all demonstrated the highly significant association with cervical cancer (All p values < 0.00001).

The analysis revealed a highly significant preference (Chi 2 = 47.145, p < 0.00001) towards conservative decisions (81.65%, n = 178) compared to invasive approaches (18.35%, n = 40).