“highly significant”

The differences are highly significant ( P < 0.0001), except for class 2,2, probably because of its low incidence, as shown by χ 2 statistical analysis with Bonferroni correction.

Of the 378 pairwise tests conducted among 28 kelp populations, 370 were highly significant ( P < 0.0001), and 6 were significant ( P < 0.05) after FDR correction ( Supplementary Table S5 ).

1 ), and the correlation between total-body creatine pool size measured with the LC-MS/MS method or the IRMS method was highly significant ( r all rats = 0.96; r all rats treatment adjusted = 0.86, data not shown; P <0.0001).

This is highly significant ( p < 0.0001) and indicates that the items used in the questionnaire have good reliability ( Campbell, David & Stephen, 2021 ).

At the end of 3 weeks; WOMAC score showed highly significant difference within ( P < 0.0001) and significant difference between groups ( P = 0.040) also by Time × group interaction ( P = 0.024), VAS showed highly significant difference within groups ( P < 0.0001).

The results from the ANOVA table revealed that the model was highly significant (P < 0.0001), while the lack of fit of each model was not significant (P > 0.05) revealing that the model adequately described the relationship between the independent variables (extraction time, solid to solvent ratio, % NADES content and amplitudes) and the dependent variables (TPC and DPPH).

Highly significant association was found between naive CD4 T cells and CD4+ RTE (all p-values <0.0001).

Hence, when looking specifically at peritumoral tumor cell clusters as a surrogate of glial migration and infiltration, the average results between control condition (8 animals) and all chemokine groups were highly significant: CXCL10 (7 animals): 37 vs. 7 ( p < 0.0001), CCL2 (9 animals): 37 vs. 28 ( p = 0.0258), CCL11 (8 animals): 37 vs. 25 ( p = 0.0003) and the combination (7 animals): 37 vs. 24 ( p = 0.0070) ( Figure 3 D). 2.2.2.

This is illustrated for this cohort, examining the 55 CVID subjects with inflammatory complications (Group 2) as compared to 59 other CVID subjects without these medical issues (Group 1) or 21 normal controls, showing highly significant differences between the patient groups (P = 0.0001.) Fig. 1 A .

The pair group comparisons of day 7 v/s day 15, day 45, and 6 months showed a highly significant difference of 0.64, 1.48, and 1.80, respectively, and P value = 0.0001.

Our results are accordance with Jampoka et al., 36 who reported a highly significant increase in the serum levels of mi-RNA-122 in NAFLD patients compared to the control group. 36 For mi-RNA-122, the AUC was 0.831 ( p < 0.0001) with 75.0% sensitivity and 82.35% specificity.

In addition, the difference between real synchrony and surrogate synchrony estimated by SUCO was highly significant ( t (44) = 43.80, p < 0.0001).

From baseline, the respiratory frequency in the MPA group was significantly lower than that in other groups ( P < 0.001), with the difference remaining highly significant as the MCH concentration increased ( P < 0.0001) (Figs. 3 h).

To determine if the effect of FMR4 on cell proliferation is reproducible in other human cell lines we carried out a similar experiment using HeLa cells and found that all three siRNAs against FMR4 also resulted in highly significant decreases in cell proliferation in comparison to control siRNA (P<0.0001) ( Figure 6B ).

As this factor showed a highly significant effect on the HD AAO (P<0.0001), we split the HD patients of the EHDN REGISTRY cohort as well as the 1 st European HD cohort by ancestry and analysed the impact of the ATG7 V471A polymorphism in these single groups.

For both calliper and photogrammetric methods the character random effect was highly significant ( p <0.0001) but the interaction between character and year was not, and was omitted from the final model.

The formation of these highly significant, cohesive subnetworks (all P < 0.0001) indicates that the candidate targets for each disease are not randomly distributed but form core functional units within the human interactome, thereby supporting their biological relevance to the respective pathophysiology.

Overall P values for flow during in situ perfusion versus ex situ perfusion could also be proven as being highly significant ( P <0.0001).

Concerning aerated areas, the results showed highly significant differences in the attenuation values for both lungs in sedated animals compared to those during spontaneous breathing under anesthesia ( p < 0.0001) and during induced apnea ( p < 0.0001) ( Table 1 ).

The mean absolute increase in lumbar BMD in the 13 patients in whom the increase was ≥ the LSC, was 0.062±0.036 g/cm 2 resulting in a percent increase from baseline of 7.8±5.9% (range; 2.4-21.5%) and there was a highly significant difference (P<0.0001, power 99.9%) between the pre and post VNS lumbar BMD in these patients.

The ANOVA test produced a highly significant result ( p < 0.0001).

The difference between the two species is also highly significant ( P < 0.0001), with the main contribution to the difference from +4 sites following UAG and UGA.

The p -values of the linear regression analysis were highly significant in all three studies (p < 0.0001).

Between-study heterogeneity was substantial (I 2 = 86.5%, τ 2 = 0.323), with a highly significant Q-test (Q = 36.96, df = 5, p < 0.0001), indicating that variability across studies reflects genuine differences rather than sampling error alone.

Likewise, the colonies headed by 3-year-old neotenics showed a highly significant increase of TA in the soma of reproductives ( F 3,39 = 97.5 for heads and F 3,37 = 73.3 for abdomens, p < 10 −4 for both; q 13,9 = 10.8 for heads of kings, q (13,8) = 13.8 for heads of queens, q (12,8) = 12.8 and 10.1 for abdomens of kings and queens, respectively, all p < 10 −4 ), though the relative differences were less dramatic than in primary colonies ( figure 3 b ).