“highly significant”

Comparative evaluation was done between Group I and Group II, Group I and control group, and Group II and control group, all showed highly significant difference ( P < 0.0001) [Tables 1 – 3 ].

The improvement of the score per case was highly significant (p = 0.0001).

As expected, linear regression analysis of: 1) the number of transcripts assembled; 2) the total Mbp sequenced; 3) the number of perfect SSRs identified; and 4) the number of putative primer pairs to SSRs, all versus the total number of SSRs identified, showed highly significant positive correlations ( R 2 = 0.81, 0.84, 0.97 and 0.98, respectively, P <0.0001 in each case).

The regression coefficient associated with the number of trials between repetitions was negative and highly significant (p<0.0001; t-test, Equation 8 ).

control, ceramic, ultrasonic, plastic, and amber, the differences were highly significant (P < 0.0001), with the same strong F-value pattern observed in the flea analysis ( Table 2 ).

As tested by in vitro germination and acetocarmine tests, the analysis of variance clearly showed that storage method, days of storage, and the interaction between storage methods and days of storage had a highly significant effect ( p ≤ 0.0001) on pollen viability.

coli ATCC 25922; the bacterial LOD was 10 2 –10 3 CFU/mL, with highly significant signal differences ( p < 0.0001).

Statistical significance for comparisons of drug responses across different numbers of cells per spot was determined using ordinary one‐way ANOVA, with highly significant differences ( **** p < 0.0001, *** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.01) for comparisons between different groups, while “NS” indicates a nonsignificant statistical difference between the data groups.

In particular, the difference was highly significant in the case of ALS (controls: 9098.68 ± 1210.76 pg/mL; ALS: 17,235.3 ± 1033.2; p < 0.0001), and AD (18,496.00 ± 1165.27; p < 0.001) and less in the case of ID (16,180.35 ± 1323.65; p = 0.004).

The between‐group survival differences were highly significant (log‐rank test, p < 0.0001).

The median (IQR) growth rate of children pre- and post-tests were −4.0 (−5.4–−2.1) SDS and 0.1 (−1.9–1.4) SDS respectively, a difference highly significant ( p < 0.0001) (Fig. 3B ).

Statistical analysis using ANOVA confirmed that the model was highly significant ( p < 0.0001), with an F-value of 34.47.

The reduction in AF burden was highly significant ( P < 0.0001) ( Table 2 ).

The chi-square tests indicated highly significant relationships across all comparisons (p < 0.0001), confirming that the observed distributions were not random ( Table 2 ).

The overall model was highly significant (Chi-square = 29.88, df = 6, p < 0.0001) with good discriminative ability (Harrell’s C-index 0.732, 95% CI 0.660–0.804), indicating how TP53 mutation is the predominant independent factor influencing outcome.

Statistical analysis confirmed that this reduction is highly significant ( p < 0.0001), indicating a pronounced structural distinction between both fiber populations.

The correlation of health practices related to vitamin D status with dental caries was highly significant ( p = 0.0001), and lesser exposure to sun was also significant ( p = 0.002) ( Table 2 ).

Interestingly, post hoc pairwise comparisons with Bonferroni correction returned a highly significant ( p < 0.0001) difference between the pure DMEM and each of the tested cell lines, showing that the sensor is capable of detecting adherent cells with respect to medium only, with the resonant frequency of the medium containing cancer cells being consistently lower than that of pure DMEM.

The interaction terms were also highly significant, including treatment × cell type, F(5, 48) = 13,118, p < 0.0001; treatment × time, F(5, 48) = 22,079, p < 0.0001; cell type × time, F(1, 48) = 36,270, p < 0.0001; and treatment × cell type × time, F(5, 48) = 6897, p < 0.0001.

A highly significant ( p < 0.0001) increase in droplet size was detected for (F1) after 60 days of storage, increasing from 1099.0 ± 33.0 nm to 1609.0 ± 35.1 nm.

The difference between VO 2 peak/kg values was highly significant among all pairwise comparisons ( p < 0.0001), excluding that between the 35–40 kg/m 2 and 40–45 kg/m 2 groups.

To statistically assess the overlap between the two gene sets, we performed a Fisher’s Exact test, which demonstrated a highly significant concordance (P < 0.0001, two-sided), indicating that the shared transcriptional response is unlikely to occur by chance (Supplementary Table S1 ).

This is a highly significant difference from a calculated expected value based on an even distribution of correlation values ( p < 0.0001, Chi-squared on proportions for both WT at day 7 and IL-17KO at day 14).

In hamsters immunized SQ, body weight plateaued on day 3 such that by day 7, the difference in weight loss between this group and unvaccinated hamsters was also highly significant ( P < 0.0001).

Discussion Highly significant differences ( p ≤ 0.0001) were observed between the accessions for all of the studied traits (Table 1 ).