Barely Significant

Excerpts

7,030 sentences · 1 filter applied

only marginally significantp = 0.0721.4× alphagold
When both direct and indirect effects are considered, the total effect of resilience on distress is negative but only marginally significant (β = –0.081, p = 0.072), suggesting that resilience alleviates distress mainly through its positive relationship with hope rather than by a strong direct impact.
marginally significantp = 0.0741.5× alphagold
However, Tukey’s post hoc tests revealed no differences between specific education levels, except for a marginally significant difference ( p = 0.074) in the ranking of Idea 8 ( popular people ) between secondary education (HAVO, n = 23, M = 5.74) and university students ( n = 167, M = 4.40). 4.
a trend towards significancep = 0.0741.5× alpha
Post hoc comparison showed that VO 2max was significantly lower for TR than that obtained during 30-15 IFT measured with a gas analyzer i.e., IFT K4 (PC = 6.1%, p = 0.007), but had only a trend towards significance when compared to the predicted value from the IFT result (PC = 4.4%, p = 0.074).
approached significancep = 0.0741.5× alpha
In the contingency table analysis ( Table 2 ), only two variables other than “asthma severity” approached significance at the 5% level: (1) asthma biologic prescription ( p = 0.074), which serves as surrogate for asthma severity; and (2) no-shows for scheduled clinic visits ( p = 0.0724).
a trend toward significancep = 0.0741.5× alpha
Follow up tests revealed that, while the control group did not change over time from pre to post and from post to retention, the experimental group showed a significant increase in the test from pre to post ( p < 0.001) and from pre to retention ( p < 0.001), while no significant differences were found from post to retention, although there was a trend toward significance ( p = 0.074).
marginally significantp = 0.0771.5× alphagold
Furthermore, a marginally significant difference in the number of MR-1 cells was observed among diphenyl Pt- thiosemicarbazone complex treatment groups (p = 0.077), and an increasing trend in the number of cells was noted from ~5.0 × 10 8 cells (methanol control group) to ~5.8 × 10 8 cells (20ppm).
marginally significantp = 0.0771.5× alphagold
The main effect of brain regions was also significant, F (2,124) = 132.134, p < 0.001, η p 2 = 0.681, as P2 amplitudes were greater in central ( M = 8.786 μV, SE = 0.391) than centro-parietal area ( M = 7.072 μV, SE = 0.392).The three-way interaction was marginally significant, F (2,124) = 2.639, p = 0.077, η p 2 = 0.041.
marginal significancep = 0.0771.5× alphagold
The proportion of cases with incision within 30 min increased from 14.3% at baseline to 10.7% at midline and 37.5% at endline, with marginal significance between baseline and endline ( p = 0.077).
showed a trendp = 0.0771.5× alpha
For the SIS-Total score, a trend in difference between the two groups was observed (F(1,15) = 3.9, p = 0.068) and the pairwise comparison showed a trend for greater improvement in the intervention group compared to the control group at both T1 (mean difference = 5.7, F(1,20.2) = 3.5, p = 0.077) and T2 (mean difference = 5.3, F(1,20.2) = 3.1, p = 0.094), although none of them were statistically significant.