“quite significant”

The overall effect was also quite significant (p<0.0001), which indicated that plasma Aβ42:Aβ40 ratio had the ability to be a biomarker for distinguishing people with PET (+) and PET (−) as well.

These correlations were, however, quite significant at occipital electrodes: (meditation—O1, r = 0.77, P = 0.0001, O2, r = 0.71, P = 0.002; control—O1, r = 0.79, P = 0.0001, O2, r = 0.75, P = 0.001.

Impact of extraction parameters on total phenol (GAE mg gallic/g DW) of branded tea samples using ultrasound technology Results of total phenol content of different brands of tea sample were obtained quite significant (p < 0.0001).

The difference in AGLA expression by FA concentration was quite significant (F (5,12) = 20.58, p < 0.0001).

4 b1 , p = .14) and was quite significant for i.v . delivery (Fig. 4 b2 , p = 1.07 × 10 −4 ).

Similar to mid-term mortality, subgroup analysis showed that LVEF improvement was quite significant in levosimendan vs. placebo subgroups (mean difference: 5.65%, 95%CI: 2.72–8.57%, P=0.0002, I 2 =33%) ( Figure 4 ).

On the other hand, the WSS change on the superior side between the control and LAL embryos is determined as quite significant ( p = 0.00022).

In Table 1 , the crude ratio of acute pancreatitis between the 2 groups were compared using Chi-squared tests, which is quite significant ( P = 0.0003).

The results were quite significant as compared to ethanol ( p < 0.001 vs. normal saline).

The reduction was observed in Group B which is quite significant (p value < 0.001) from that of Group A and Group E, while it was significant at p value < 0.01 from Group C and D.

There are two important differences between the two groups regarding the prediction model of ED: the model explains the higher ED variance in psoriasis patients (35%) when compared to healthy persons (19%), and the contribution of expressive suppression is moderately significant in healthy persons ( p < 0.05), and quite significant in psoriasis patients ( p < 0.001) ( Table 7 ).

Ultimately, the results of the comparison of the mean quality of life among all the three groups of infertile without endometriosis, infertile with endometriosis, and fertile with endometriosis with the normal group were quite significant ( P < 0.001) (Fig. 1 ).

Although some of these fixed effects were quite significant ( P < 0.001), their use here was primarily to control for unobserved spatial variations.

Greater suppression of spontaneous motor activity in ME‐400 mg/kg‐treated groups was observed at all time intervals as compared to the ME‐200 mg/kg treated group, and was quite significant (*** p < 0.001) with respect to the negative control group.

The meta-analysis's findings demonstrated that PRP may considerably reduce DFU healing times when compared to traditional therapy, and the difference was quite significant ( p < 0.001). 10 In a randomized, double-blind study, Driver et al. 21 investigated the effectiveness of PRP treatment for DFU.

Confirming that absenteeism trends change over time, especially during and following the COVID-19 epidemic, the year variable is also quite significant (F = 15.796, p < 0.001); partial η 2 = 0.028.

A complete response was found to be statistically quite significant in patients with the positive autologous serum test( p = 0.001).

When bed rails were used during the night, they had a protective effect, which is quite significant, as 37 of the 123 falls occurred during the night (P<0.001).

The reduction in risk of developing GH among the subjects of study group compared to control group was quite significant (RR 2.65; CI 1.42–4.95; p < 0.001).

Of SNPs having p < 0.04, about 65 per cent came from the 'haplotype conforming' category, and this excess was quite significant ( p ≈ 0.001).

However, the bone density in Group III patients was still more than the Group II and III patients which were quite significant ( P < 0.001).

The difference between the two groups was quite significant ( P < 0.001).

The Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin was 0.92, and the Bartlett test results were quite significant (χ 2 = 4337.71, df = 78, p < 0.001).

According to study results, the mean angle of kyphosis in these patients at the presentation was 63.24 ± 9.96 and at the end of the study was 36.5 ± 13.4°, which the difference was quite significant both before and after treatment ( P < 0.001).

A quite significant correlation between the magnitude of ADRB index and IgG responses to PfMSP1p19 was found (Rho = 0.71 and 0.68, P < 10 −3 for Dielmo and Ndiop, respectively).