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 = .163.2× alphagold
Compared with those who declined assistance, patients who received educational counseling had significantly lower odds of readmission (aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.31–0.90; P = .02), and those who were initiated on addiction-related medications showed a nonsignificant trend toward reduced risk (aOR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.32–1.21; P = .16).
a nonsignificant trendP =0.163.2× alphagold
Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that there were no effects on all‐cause mortality across subgroups based on age, sex, or ethnicity (Figures S8 through S10 ), although there was a nonsignificant trend to increased mortality among the White population with RASi therapy (RR, 1.52; [95% CI, 0.85–2.72]; P =0.16).
a nonsignificant trendp =0.1643.3× alphagold
When comparing varyingly attained lowest LDL-C levels, a nonsignificant trend toward alower HR of CV and all-cause mortality was noted at the LDL-C level between 70 and 100 mg/dL (CV mortality; HR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.35–1.20; p =0.164; all-cause mortality; HR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.65–1.08; p =0.177). 4.
a nonsignificant trendp = 0.1653.3× alphagold
SGLT2i use was associated with significantly fewer HF exacerbations (HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.48–0.86; p < 0.01), all-cause hospitalizations (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.58–0.91; p < 0.01), and acute kidney injury (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.35–0.79; p < 0.01), with a nonsignificant trend toward lower all-cause mortality (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.63–1.08; p = 0.165) [ 45 ].
a nonsignificant trendp = .1683.4× alphagold
Consistent with the accuracy data, the reaction time data also showed a nonsignificant trend towards a word-meaning priming effect (all primed conditions vs. unprimed: β = –0.060, SE = 0.043, z = –1.379, p = .168), and there was no evidence of an expectedness effect ( p s > .724). 2.2.1.3 Rate of correct responses (RCR) As an exploratory analysis, we combined the accuracy and reaction time data to form a measure of the rate of correct responses (RCR) a participant makes in this task, defined as the (proportion of correct responses/((RT in ms/60,000)) (see Vandierendonck, 2017 , for an evaluation of this method).
a nonsignificant trendp = 0.1693.4× alphagold
There was a nonsignificant trend toward treatment difference observed in the high-dose IV cohort of 0.024 (95% CI –0.011 to 0.060; unadjusted p = 0.169) for SUVR BAI-WM , representing a 30% reduction in amyloid accumulation relative to placebo (Fig. 2e ).
a nonsignificant trendP = 0.173.4× alphagold
FIGHT (Functional impact of GLP-1 for heart failure treatment in patient with advanced heart failure) study ( N = 300) conducted with liraglutide (Median left ventricular ejection fraction of 25%) had a nonsignificant trend of increase in HHF (HR = 1.30, 95% CI 0.89-1.88, P = 0.17) and death (HR = 1.10, 95% CI, 0.57-2.14, P = 0.78).[ 28 ] Another study LIVE (Liraglutide on Left Ventricular Function in Chronic Heart Failure Patients With and Without Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus) also found a significant increase in serious adverse cardiac events with liraglutide (12 vs. 3, P = 0.04), compared to placebo.[ 29 ] Forest plot in Figure 6 summarizes the HHF outcomes in all CVOTs.
a nonsignificant trendp = 0.173.4× alphagold
Bivariate correlation analyses, using Pearson’s correlation coefficients for baseline expressions of the aforementioned genes with the clinical parameters, revealed a negative correlation between PKM2 gene expression and the ΔDAS28 after 3 months of follow-up (r = −0.433, p = 0.02) and only a nonsignificant trend with regard to SDHB expression (r= −0.274, p = 0.17).
a nonsignificant trendp = 0.173.4× alphagold
Across all TCGA breast cancer cases, enrichment of the murine AGED signature showed a nonsignificant trend toward shorter PFS (HR = 1.3, 95% CI = 0.9–1.8; p = 0.17; n = 1109) (Fig. 7C ), that became significantly associated with worse PFS among women age ≥65 years at breast cancer diagnosis (HR = 1.9, 95% CI = 1.0–3.6; p = 0.036; n = 323) (Fig. 7D ).