Barely Significant
← all phrases

“a nonsignificant trend”

5,407 sentences · 5,407 papers · 7,516 search hits before verification · confirmed specimen

Sighted at

p<0.1

Listed by Hankins (2013) · Otte et al. (2022)

In the literature

a nonsignificant trendp = 0.0741.5× alphagold
After PSM, median PFS was 23.0 months (95% CI: 12.1–53.1) in the PD‐L1 < 50% group versus 4.5 months (95% CI: 2.7–19.8) in the ≥ 50% group, showing a nonsignificant trend toward shorter PFS (HR: 1.84; 95% CI: 0.93–3.63, p = 0.074) (Figure 3A ).
a nonsignificant trendP = .0741.5× alphagold
When we compared variant takeover to estimated immunity from vaccination alone, there was no relationship between immunity and takeover rates, a statistically significant delay in Delta takeover date ( P = .01) and time from establishment to dominance ( P = .011) for Omicron in states with higher vaccine-induced immunity, and a nonsignificant trend to delayed takeover date for Omicron in more vaccinated states ( P = .074) ( Supplementary Figure S3 ).
a nonsignificant trendP = 0.0741.5× alphagold
In patients with infection, there was a nonsignificant trend toward a faster elevation of CRP at 24 h after admission (65 vs. 120 mg/L; P = 0.074), higher and longer sustained values on the fifth day (73 vs. 127; P = 0.108) and on the seventh day (12 vs. 48; P = 0.088), and later peaks depending on the onset of infection.
a nonsignificant trendP = 0.0751.5× alphagold
8.3 days, P = 0.014) in univariate analyses, and that ASP introduction was related to a nonsignificant trend toward reduced mortality (odds ratio, 0.55; P = 0.075) in multivariate analysis.
a nonsignificant trendP = 0.0751.5× alphagold
Although rheumatoid arthritis exhibited only a nonsignificant trend toward higher prevalence (odds ratio (OR) = 1.81; P = 0.075), and multiple sclerosis did not show a significant association (OR = 0.90; P = 0.07), the overall pattern indicates a systemic predisposition to immune dysregulation among women with PCOS ( Sharmeen et al. 2021 , Jiang et al. 2024 ).
a nonsignificant trendp = .0751.5× alphagold
The best fitting models that aimed to explain individual variation in Exploration–Avoidance component scores revealed a significant group effect ( F = 10.226, df 1,2 = 4,8, p = .003) and a nonsignificant trend of interaction of group and age ( F = 3.099, df 1,2 = 5,8, p = .075).
a nonsignificant trendp = 0.0751.5× alphagold
The authors state “No differences between alcohol and AmED for any of the time points were observed, although there was a nonsignificant trend for higher ratings for AmED versus alcohol alone at 40 minutes, t (38) = 1.47, p = 0.075.” The between-groups comparison, therefore, failed to reveal any significant effects.
a nonsignificant trendp =.0751.5× alphagold
Between -unit comparisons of uniformity patterns produced mixed evidence: For the white background, spatial maps of units OLED-A versus OLED-B ( p =.998) and OLED-A versus OLED-C ( p =.977) did not correspond, whereas a nonsignificant trend towards a matching spatial luminance pattern was observed for OLED-B versus OLED-C ( p =.075).