“highly significant”

Comparing the 5 min intervals with repeated measures ANOVA, the changes during the experiments are highly significant ( F 9,108 = 21.0; p < 0.0001).

The difference between T × NC hybrid and all other forms was highly significant ( P < 0.0001) (Table 4 ).

The test for heterogeneity was highly significant [ Q ( df = 34) = 577.47, p < 0.0001].

A highly significant (P < 0.0001) decrease in MWCNT lung burden with post-exposure time was determined.

This difference was highly significant, also when correcting for small difference between the sequences at pre-test, t (14) = 5.749, p<0.0001.

Highly significant relationships were identified for both parameters ( P <.0001).

The log-rank (Mantel-Cox) test revealed highly significant differences between survival curves (χ2 = 86.49, df = 4, p < 0.0001), indicating that survival probability strongly depended on age at the time of infection.

Splenocytes from mice vaccinated intravenously with RALA/ mGPC2 produced highly significant levels of antigen-specific IFN-γ (107.1 SFU/250,000 cells ±18.65; p < 0.0001) and IL-2 (100.6 SFU/250,000 cells ±22.61; p < 0.001).

The Pearson correlation between the floristic ordination and the constrained ordination was 0.893 on Axis 1 and 0.786 on Axis 2; both the correlations and the size of the eigenvalues were highly significant (p < 0.0001 by Monte Carlo permutation tests).

Patients in Arm A demonstrated significant improvements in clinical scores compared to baseline, with highly significant differences at 6, 12, 24, and 36 months ( P < .0001).

A simple regression of ranks of male participants and female participants in the couples’ group showed a highly significant positive relationship, R = .997, Y = 0.14+0.97, F(1,6) = 105.7, p<.0001, confirming that the preference for the different morphs were nearly identical for both sexes.

The difference in percentage of weight gain or loss during the first week after challenge between the groups was highly significant ( P < 0.0001).

For the remaining data, we observed a highly significant effect of interaural correlation on ITD thresholds ( F (1,19) = 30.25, P < 0.0001).

We found inter-individual variation to be highly significant ( P < 0.0001) and the effect of digitisation on both shape and size of no importance (not shown).

The most significant differences were observed in the comfort and gag reflex domains, both showing highly significant results ( p = 0.0001).

The mean decrease observed in the VAS scores and Nirschl stage at 2 week and 6 week follow up after steroid injection came out to be highly significant (p<0.0001) (Table 2 ).

According to Table 3 , the ANOVA for the response surface quadratic regression model showed that the model was highly significant ( p < 0.0001) with a very high F -value (211.56 and 253.50).

Similarly, by week 36, a highly significant reduction of 37.3% was found in the Resmetirom group compared with a decrease of 8.5% in the placebo group ( P < 0.0001).

We detected a highly significant interaction effect in the EPM between genotype and compartment [ F (2,96)=13.74, P <0.0001].

Analysis of older group An ANOVA on SOA (4 levels) and load (2 levels) revealed highly significant main effects of both SOA [ F (3, 28) = 19.83, p < .0001] and load [ F (1, 30) = 22.73, p < .0001] and a significant interaction between the two [ F (3, 28) = 4.14, p < .01].

All these final selected variables showed a highly significant negative relationship with the infection rate (p < 0.0001; Tmin r = − 0.25, AP r = − 0.23, RH r = − 0.21).

The BMD measured at the right first molar tooth within the alveolar bone showed a highly significant regression with age (brightness = 166.8 − 1.3 × age, r = 0.65, P < 0.0001).

The predicted quadratic models were fitted due to their highly significant ( p < 0.0001) and excellent determination coefficient (R 2 = 0.9944).

Comparing the parameter values of the models with exponential relationship for capture rates, there is a clear trend from a highly significant negative relationship for the uncorrected densities (ε a = −0.0103, SE = 0.0014, p < 0.0001), a shallower slope with lower significance for the one-sided correction (ε a = −0.0032, SE = 0.0014, p = 0.020) to a non-significant (constant) relationship under the two-sided correction (ε a = −0.0016, SE = 0.0014, p = 0.267 in the second best model fitting; see Table 2 for parameter estimates for the best fitting models, respectively).

Growth Performance ANOVA analysis revealed a highly significant effect of treatment on average daily gain ( Figure 1 ; p < 0.0001).