Probabilities ( P ) of ≤ 0.05 were considered statistically significant, whereas values of 0.05 < P < 0.10 were declared a near-significant trend.
← all phrases
“a near-significant trend”
Sighted at
p=0.07
In the literature
Statistical significance was declared at P ≤ 0.05, with 0.05 < P ≤ 0.10 considered as a near-significant trend.
There was a near-significant trend in the same direction in the dual-frequency probe sessions.
For hazardous drinking (according to AUDIT-C score), there was a near-significant trend for differences across the PG categories, although in this instance, it was low-risk gamblers that had the highest proportion identified as hazardous drinkers.
In the present study, however, UKA only showed significantly higher walking speed and range of motion in the early acute phase, with a near-significant trend favoring UKA in overall walking speed trajectory.
After pooling three studies, we found that mHealth interventions showed a near-significant trend toward increasing average daily steps (SMD = 0.57), but the overall effect did not reach statistical significance ( P = 0.07) and exhibited moderate heterogeneity (I2 = 65%).
Importantly, following the health check monkeys showed a near-significant trend to be faster to disengage first gaze, and spent less time looking towards aggressive faces, compared with neutral faces, suggesting avoidance of presumably threatening social information relative to more neutral social stimuli.
The age-group moderating effect analysis indicated a near-significant trend.
The change is statistically significant for women, while men exhibited a near-significant trend (approaching, but not reaching, the alpha-level of 0.05).
However, we did find a near-significant trend of decreasing APTT, which may hint that despite the neutral findings in the TEG-measurements, the intrinsic cascade may be affected, which is in alignment with earlier research [ 26 , 27 ].
Chi-square analysis revealed no statistically significant association between patient age groups and the type of renal comorbidity (χ 2 = 16.90, df = 10, p = 0.076), although a near-significant trend was observed.
There was also a near-significant trend, at long distractor-target ISIs, for trait anxiety to be positively associated with letter identification slowing following moderate threat distractor faces versus neutral distractor faces, r (19) = 0.35, p = 0.059, one-tailed.
The moderator test (QM = 7.78, p = 0.0999) indicated a near-significant trend, suggesting potential differences between intervention types, although the results did not reach statistical significance at the 5% level.
Probabilities of p ≤ 0.05 were significant and 0.05 < p ≤ 0.10 were a near-significant trend.
A near-significant trend was observed for CAT scores at three months, with the sustained non-smoking group reporting markedly lower symptom levels compared with the sustained smoking and smoking relapse groups.
However, at 25 °C, a near-significant trend emerged, and by 30 °C, the differences were clearly significant, indicating a temperature-dependent enhancement of the fungus’s discriminatory growth response to the physicochemical characteristics of the HDPE surfaces. 4.