Barely Significant

Excerpts

8,476 sentences · 1 filter applied

of borderline significancep = 0.061.2× alpha
While we noted an increased proportion of CD4 + CD69 + T cells in the PB of all patients (as shown in Table 1 ), a statistically significant difference was found only between the RRMM group and healthy controls ( p = 0.027); in the newly diagnosed (NDMM) group, the increase in CD69 + cell expansion was of borderline significance ( p = 0.06).
approached significancep < 0.061.2× alpha
Conjunctival Antigen-Presenting Cells The percentage of bone-marrow-derived CD45 + cells in the conjunctiva obtained by impression cytology from all three sites—superior bulbar (SB), nasal bulbar (NB), and temporal bulbar (TB)—was significantly higher in the KCS group ( p < 0.02) and approached significance in cells obtained from the SB alone ( p < 0.06).
nearly significantp = 0.061.2× alphagold
Importantly, the KA+MI 120 mg group displayed similar learning dynamics: in addition to a significant difference in mean escape latency between day 1 and 4, there was a significant reduction in the latency period on day 4 relative to day 2 ( p = 0.03) and a nearly significant reduction on day 3 relative to day 1 ( p = 0.06).
a clear trendp = 0.061.2× alphagold
Dunnett’s post hoc testing after ANOVA revealed a significant preventive effect for ectoine and a clear trend for NADA ( p = 0.06). 5-Hydroxyectoine had considerably smaller effects that did not prove to be statistically significant, probably due to the sample size of n = 10. 3.
borderline significantp = 0.061.2× alphagold
Examination of the model investigating the statistical interaction between STAT1 and TGFB2 showed that there was a borderline significant increase in HR for the TGFB2 high group of patients (HR (95% CI range) = 1.84 (0.97–3.46); p = 0.06) There was a significant increase in HR for the STAT1 high group of patients (HR (95% CI range) = 2 (1.08–3.71); p = 0.029), accounting for significant impact of age at diagnosis (HR (95% CI range) = 1.03 (1.01–1.05); p = 0.005).
marginally significantp = 0.061.2× alphagold
A 3 (Group: 3 mo, 15 mo, 22 mo) × Time Period (CS, ITI, Post-CS) ANOVA conducted to assess responding during this session found a main effect of time period, F (2, 34) = 6.46, MSE = 1067.50, p = 0.004, η p 2 = 0.28, a marginally significant interaction, F (3, 34) = 2.57, MSE = 1067.50, p = 0.06, η p 2 = 0.23, and no effect of group, F = 1.86, p = 0.19, despite a clear visual trend showing decreased freezing in middle-aged and old animals.