“highly significant”

The results were concluded to be statistically significant with P < 0.05, very significant with P < 0.001, and highly significant with P < 0.0001.

All inter-device correlations elicited a highly significant correlation with r-values of 0.72–0.86 (all p < 0.0001, Table 2 , Supplemental Figure S4).

For discrimination of patients with metastasized NEN from presumably cured NEN patients, the combination of cfDNA concentration, hypomethylation, and cfDNA integrity revealed a highly significant AUC of 0.908 (95% CI, 0.83 to 0.99; p = 0.0001) with a positive predictive value (PPV) of 91.1% and negative predictive value (NPV) of 66.7% at the chosen classification cutoff of 0.5 ( Figure 4 B).

1 e) and found a highly significant correlation (Spearman's r = 0.57 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.54–0.60], p < 0.0001).

Correlation Between Genomic Homozygosity and Re The correlation between Re and the whole genomic homozygosity estimate (FROH) was negative and highly significant (ρ = −0.147, P < 0.0001, Figure 3 ).

Notably, while the unadjusted analysis showed only a borderline association ( P = 0.053), the fully adjusted models revealed a robust and highly significant relationship ( P < 0.0001).

The observed highly significant decrease of CD4 + T cell numbers in the spinal cord ( p < 0.0001) versus the statistically significant but small differences of T cell numbers in the spleen, however, suggest that local alternations may be responsible for improved functional recovery.

The DPPH assay revealed a highly significant treatment effect by one-way ANOVA (F (6,14) = 82.40, p < 0.0001), accompanied by a substantial effect size (η 2 = 0.972; 95% CI: 0.93–0.99).

Regarding TB sample types, a highly significant difference was observed between the sample types ( p < 0.0001), with pulmonary TB samples showing a higher prevalence of MDR-TB isolates (274/371, 73.9%) compared to extrapulmonary TB samples (12/39, 30.8%) (Table 1 ).

The statistical difference in number of accessory genes between MRSP and MSSP isolates as measured using Welch’s t -test was highly significant ( p < 0.0001), with MRSP isolates harboring an average of more than 150 accessory genes compared to their MSSP counterparts ( Figure 3C ).

In contrast, Nrf2 knockdown revealed a suppressive effect on cell proliferation, compared with NTC and Keap1 RNAi, respectively, which became highly significant at 48 h ( p < 0.0001, Figure 4 b).

Geographical Differences in Skull Shape, Diversity and Size Highly significant shape differences ( p < 0.0001) were detected among all areas, except between Arctic localities (High Arctic vs.

Controlling for these potential effects, the method remained highly significant (P < 0.0001).

Transition-type was highly significant [ F (3, 27) = 130.5, p < 0.0001, η 2 = 0.35], and SOA was also highly significant [ F (3, 27) = 93.046, p < 0.0001, ε = 0.586, η 2 = 0.12].

In the TECAR group, PPT increased non-significantly by approximately 41% from T0 to T2 ( p = 0.053), and significantly by approximately 49% from T2 to T4 ( p = 0.002), resulting in an overall highly significant increase of approximately 110% from T2 to T4 ( p < 0.0001).

The positive correlation between tea consumption and total flavonoids was highly significant, with an R2 = 0.7968 ( p < 0.0001).

Due to the large number of variables, non-parametric tests were consistently used and a statement regarding statistical significance was only made in the case of highly significant p-values ( p ≤ 0.0001).

Highly significant differences ( P <0.0001) were observed among participants across the different AIP risk levels in terms of age, gender, race, education level, marital status, poverty-to-income ratio, 12-month average daily alcohol consumption, depression, LE8 score, CVH level, health behaviors score, and health factors score.

Statistical analysis Analysis of variance showed highly significant differences among ranks ( p <0.0001), in terms of the number of genes coding for TFs, as depicted in Additional file 10 .

Quantitative IgG levels showed a highly significant inverse correlation with viral loads (p<0.0001) ( Figure ).

When comparing typical anti‐MAG neuropathy patients with typical CIDP patients in univariate analysis, a highly significant difference between the proportion of patients with and without supportive and unsupportive features was confirmed ( p < 0.0001 for each of the seven features).

The PERMANOVA showed a highly significant difference between the three populations ( F = 8.79, DF = 2, P = 0.0001) as well as for each pair of populations ( S2 Table ).

The spline for child age was highly significant ( χ 2 = 459.23, df = 8, p < 0.0001) and showed a more complex functional form (EDF = 6.95).

All the group showed statistically highly significant values ( p < 0.0001) from Day 2 onwards.

The highly significant slopes ( P < 0.0001) between the linear relationships ranged from 0.7 to 1.1, with the weakest relationships apparent for Q. robur (average slope of 0.8 for all methods), likely caused the relatively low amount of detect vessels and its variance between methods.