“highly significant”

In that study, NGR was found to have highly significant associations with BOAS in the bulldog breeds (French Bulldogs p<0.0001, Bulldogs p<0.0001), but not Pugs (p>0.05).

This difference was highly significant ( p <0.0001), showing high breast cancer risk among post-menopausal females.

Despite the higher rate of positivity (20%) that was found with Flow-SuperRCA, a highly significant correlation was observed between the KIT p.D816V VAF obtained with both methods (Rρ = 0.92; P < .0001; Figure 1 C).

The model was highly significant ( p < 0.0001), and the global performance of the test is explained by the area under the ROC curve, which is equals to 0.84 (95% CI).

The risk ratios and mean ± standard deviations of biomarkers, anatomical features, and outcome measures of the experimental subjects were highly significant compared to controls ( p < 0.0001).

III + IV) the difference was highly significant ( p < 0.0001) with successful separation in 9 out of 10 cases using 0.01 mol/L HCl.

The association between CT repeatability and the wind parameters (average wind speed, maximum wind speed and wind direction) were generally poor and not significant, with the exception of 2016 ArduCrop where correlations were highly significant ( P < 0.0001) and ranged from 0.24 to 0.28.

Among the model terms, pH (A) and temperature (B) showed highly significant effects (p < 0.0001), while calcination time (C) was found to be statistically insignificant (p = 0.5976).

Seaweed supplementation increases total plasma and mitochondrial antioxidant capacities The overall effect of dietary seaweed supplementation on plasma total antioxidant capacity, TAC ( Fig 5A ) was highly significant (F 3,20 = 18.7, p < 0.0001).

The main effects of cue validity and search type were highly significant, F(1, 23) = 33.7, p < .0001, η 2 p = .59, and F(1, 23) = 298.9, p < .0001, η 2 p = .93, respectively, and so was the interaction between these factors, F(1, 23) = 30.2, p < .0001, η 2 p = .57.

A highly significant difference in Gallerimycin mRNA levels was observed between the PA and PW control groups (p ≤ 0.0001), indicating a substantial impact of P. aeruginosa infection on gene expression compared to the control group ( Figure 6A ).

The difference of -4.0 points was statistically highly significant (p < 0.0001), suggesting a potentially clinically relevant improvement.

Correlation analysis between SPR and ACM illuminance measurements (in lux) for visible light ( Table 1 ) resulted to be strong ( r = 0.946) and highly significant ( p < 0.0001) with a slope of 0.558.

In both cases, the differences between the genotypes are highly significant (accelerated: P <0.0001; rocking: P <0.0001, two-way ANOVA).

The median values of t 90 were the longest in smokers and the shortest in nonsmokers and this effect was highly significant (p <0.0001).

The vedolizumab group (n = 15) showed a significant increase ( P = 0.007) despite greater variability in baseline concentrations, while the anti-TNF group (n = 14) demonstrated a more uniform response pattern with highly significant increases ( P < 0.0001).

For the awake group, there was a highly significant difference ( P < 0.0001) in all brain regions between the test–retest and the memantine-challenge conditions.

A highly significant interaction term between time and group was found (p<0.0001) revealing a statistically significant different evolution of the 6MWD for intervention and control groups ( figure 2 ).

The extraction temperature ( X 2 ) and time ( X 3 ) showed a highly significant impact on the extracted amount of rhein because of their p -values of <0.0001.

A highly significant difference in overall survival (OS) was detected between high- and low-risk groups ( P < 0.0001) as shown in Fig. 6 b.

It shows a highly significant ( p < 0.0001) reduction in MU (and thereby plan complexity) when enabling HF mode compared to both HF disabled templates with median MU of 3430, 3549, 2854, and 2888 for HFoffRoff, HFoffRon, HFonRoff, and HFonRon, respectively.

The obtained scores were well correlated with each other in a highly significant manner ( p <0.0001), with rho values ranging from 0.39 to 0.64.

In the former case, this difference was very highly significant: 10.64 in controls (MOM estimator) vs. 7.43 in ADHD (Test statistic = 3.22, p < 0.0001), while in the latter, it was not significant: 10.13 vs. 8.13, respectively for control and ADHD groups (Test statistic = 1.99, p = 0.103) ( Fig. 4 ).

For age, both the GPT-3.5 and GPT-4mini cohorts demonstrated highly significant departures from the census distribution (GPT-3.5: χ 2(17) = 1310.4, p < 0.0001; GPT-4mini: χ 2(17) = 1866.1, p < 0.0001), indicating that the age profiles of the simulated patients were not representative of the general population.

Cochran's Q‐test was highly significant (Q(14) = 1668.86, p < 0.0001), proving significant inconsistency among studies.