Barely Significant

Excerpts

33,758 sentences · 1 filter applied

not quite significantP = 0.051.0× alphagold
where P < 0.05 indicates statistical significance [...] was found to be slightly smaller than that of basal cells (−181 ± 21 pA, n = 7, P27–P30) but the difference was not quite significant (P = 0.05)” (PMID 18174213) “... resting activity of A5 neurons was marginally but not significantly higher in toxin-treated rats (0.9 ± 0.2vs. 1.8 ± 0.5 Hz, P = 0.068)” (PMID 22526887) “... significantly smaller than with fura-6F alone (P = 0.009), and slightly smaller than with fura-6F and EGTA (
borderline significancep = 0.051.0× alpha
All relevant variables retrieved from univariate analysis together with duration of infertility -that showed borderline significance (p = 0.05) on univariate analysis -were subsequently included in the multivariate analysis of factors related to the top quality blastocyst formation rate.
marginally significantP <0.051.0× alphagold
Individually significant F st values were only found in pairwise comparisons involving Anchorage Island (Binomial proportions test, P <0.05) and this pattern became even stronger when marginally significant P -values (0.08< P <0.05) were taken into account (14/21 versus 0/15 for comparisons excluding Anchorage; Binomial proportions test, P = 0.0002).
marginally significantP>0.051.0× alphagold
Microzooplankton biomass, however, differed significantly among treatments (ANOVA, treatment effect: F 5, 28 = 2.4; P = 0.05, block effect: F 5, 28 = 2.2; P>0.05, no interaction effect, Figure 1B ); however, only one planned contrast, which tested the effects of stickleback ecology, was marginally significant (all others P>0.05): the generalist (G) treatment had higher biomass of microzooplankton than the no fish (NF) treatment (planned contrast t-test: t 10.3 = −2.13, P = 0.02, Table 1 ).
nominally significantp<0.051.0× alphagold
More specifically, out of 4,350,741 SNPs that indicated no heterogeneity between studies, those 185,986 SNPs that were nominally significant (p<0.05) and showed the same effect direction in all three studies were considered for the pathway enrichment analysis.
borderline significantp = 0.051.0× alphagold
When all inflammation markers, significantly associated with breast cancer, were included together in the same model (model I) the risk estimates remained similar (i.e., the effects seemed to be independent of each other), but the association was only borderline significant for IL-1β (p = 0.05).