“highly significant”

Similarly, the comparison between 2020 and 2023 showed highly significant differences ( p < 0.0001).

The difference among the groups was highly significant ( P < .0001).

In addition, the Chi-squared test demonstrated a highly significant association between SIRS and complications (χ 2 = 21.01, DF = 2, p < 0.0001) ( Figure 3 ).

The multiple linear regression analysis showed that second-order polynomial models were adequately accurate to predict the relevant responses because not only were highly significant ( p < 0.0001), but also had insignificant lack-of-fit values ( Table 4 and Table 5 ).

In all cases, the values of p were highly significant ( p < 0.0001).

A smoothed spline Cox PH model (Figure 3 ) showed a highly significant ( P value <0.0001), mostly linear relationship between patient age and increasing risk for log‐transformed mortality.

The analysis of variance (ANOVA) results showed that the regression model is highly significant, with an F-value of 302.13 and p < 0.0001, while the lack-of-fit was not significant ( p > 0.05), indicating good agreement between predicted and experimental values ( Table 6 ).

One-way ANOVA showed no difference in the mean of ADC values between the groups with a p -value of 0.525, but additional Jonckheere-Terpstra tests showed highly significant ( p < 0.0001) trends towards increasing SWE and decreasing ADC across the groups.

The separation in the survival distributions for those with perfusion defects and those without perfusion defects was highly significant (log-rank p = 0.0001).

Two-way ANOVA (genotype × light) showed no significant main effect of genotype, F(1,23) = 0.67, p = 0.42, a highly significant main effect of light, F(1, 23) = 51.90, p < 0.0001, and no significant genotype × light interaction, F(1, 23) = 0.42, p = 0.52.

The difference in mathematics score was highly significant ( P value < 0.0001) between nonanemic noniron deficient (group III) and anemic iron deficient (group I), it was significant ( P value 0.001) between nonanemic noniron deficient (group III) and nonanemic iron deficient (group II).

SteatoTest weighted accuracy was also highly significant in 141 patients with diabetes 0.76 (0.72–0.80; p = 0.0001).

There was a highly significant association between a specific line of treatment and type of ACS (p < 0.0001).

Among them, all DVH (V 5 -V 30 , MLD) and volume (ITV, PTV, TV, LPR) parameters exhibited highly significant between-group differences ( p < 0.0001) and large effect sizes (absolute Cohen’s d > 1).

The two approaches showed very strong agreement, with a highly significant correlation ( p < 0.0001, r = 0.99).

Highly significant age-related effects ( p = 0.0001) in the ABR thresholds were detected in the MSM strain at 8 months of age, and the significance by post-hoc test was presented by the elevation in ABR thresholds at 4 kHz ( Table S4 ).

With a highly significant overall model ( p < 0.0001, F = 235.71) and a robust signal-to-noise ratio (46.08), the model reliably explains the variability in the response variable ( Table ).

The fitted regression was highly significant (Model p < 0.0001; R2 = 0.9025; F = 40.1) and the lack-of-fit was non-significant ( p = 0.2151), confirming that the model explains solubility well within the studied domain.

The first component explained the largest portion of the variance, accounting for 41.144% with an eigenvalue of 9.463224, and was highly significant (chi-square = 30699.3, p < 0.0001).

One highly significant cluster with a relative risk (RR) of 4.7(p<0.0001) included 32 hamlets and 27 cases in 33,609 population.

All T 2 values are highly significant ( p < 0.0001), indicating a strong, consistent influence of factors (time from surgery, speed of walking) on the electromyographic profile.

The difference between Groups B vs C: D: E were statistically highly significant (p value < 0.0001;<0.0001; <0.001).

Two-port ECTR demonstrated an exceptionally large and highly significant effect (SMD = −4.47, 95% CI: −5.67 to −3.26; p < 0.0001), suggesting a profound reduction in symptom severity.

Prin1 showed a highly significant correlation to the genomic GC content ( R = 0.9394, p < 0.0001), indicating that, to a large extent, genomic GC content determined amino acid usage.

8 ) showed especially positive responses in regard to being ‘hard-working’, ‘academic’ and ‘intelligent’ (all highly significant against approachability, p < 0.0001).