Barely Significant

Excerpts

5,102 sentences · 1 filter applied

showed a trendp = 0.234.6× alpha
The treatments showed a trend of improved blood glucose concentration at 120 min during 75 g OGTT (148.8 ± 21.1 vs. 142.9 ± 19.1 mg/dL; p = 0.23) and resulted in a significant increase of normal glucose tolerance (NGT) response in PA patients ( n = 13, from 23% to 38%) ( p = 0.0004, Chi-square test) ( Figure 7 A,B).
a significant trendp = 0.2414.8× alphagold
On the contrary, Figure 3 B shows that natural killer lymphocytes ( p = 0.131), natural killer lymphocyte granzyme + ( p = 0.521), T cytotoxic lymphocyte granzyme + ( p = 0.760), T natural killer lymphocytes ( p = 0.131), total plasma cells ( p = 0.822) and Ab-secreting plasma cells ( p = 0.497) did not have a significant trend among the four groups, nor did the number of days to negative nasopharyngeal swab ( p = 0.241).
showed a trendp = 0.3917.8× alpha
In the present study, we analysed CD36 by IHC in TMAs from tumour specimens obtained during cystectomy and found that CD36 immunopositivity was significantly associated with greater depth of tumour invasion (pT3b-pT4 stage) and showed a trend toward association with greater lymph node involvement (pN stage) ( p = 0.391), both of which are well-known markers of poor prognosis in MIBC [ 38 ].
a positive trendp = 0.479.4× alphagold
TRF interventions showed null effects for HDL-c (k = 8, 0.00 (95% CI [−0.60, 0.61]), p = 0.99), and a positive trend to reduce the LDL-c (k = 7, 4.48 (95% CI [−7.60, 16.56]), p = 0.47), total cholesterol (k = 8, 8.14 (95% CI [−8.37, 24.65]), p = 0.33) and triglycerides (k = 9, 8.93 (95% CI [−1.58, 19.45]), p = 0.10) levels ( Table 3 ; Figure 3 ).
a significant trendp = 0.6112.2× alphagold
Using mixed models, we did not find a significant trend over time for hemoglobin levels ( p = 0.61) or ferritin levels ( p = 0.36), and no difference in evolution between groups was observed ( p = 0.59 for hemoglobin and 0.60 for ferritin). 3.3.
approached significancep = 0.64412.9× alpha
There was a decrease in NPS ratings of pain severity from pre- to post-intervention that approached significance (mean PDI PRE Intervention: 19 ± 10; mean PDI POST Intervention ± SD POST Intervention: 21 ± 20; t = −0.486, df = 6, p = 0.644; mean Pain Interference PRE Intervention: 2.1 ± 2.3; mean Pain Interference POST Intervention ± SD POST Intervention: 0.6 ± 0.8; t = 3.161, df = 6, p = 0.052).