Barely Significant
← all phrases

“a numerical trend”

1,013 sentences · 1,013 papers · 1,817 search hits before verification · confirmed specimen

Sighted at

p=0.09

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

In the literature

Despite the difference in feed intakes between housing groups in this study, there were no significant differences in growth rates in the pre-weaning period ( p = 0.74), although as mentioned above, there was a numerical trend towards higher growth rates in the pair housed calves around the time of weaning, which could be explained by the increased solid feed intakes.
10.1136/jitc-2020-000871.supp1 Supplementary data Discussion Our study did not observe a significant difference in overall toxicity between age cohorts, although there was a numerical trend toward lower all-grade and ≥G3 toxicities in the ≥75 years compared with the younger cohort, and the discontinuation rates for toxicity were lowest in the oldest age cohort.
While increases in the humoral response did not differ statistically between participants who withheld their medication and those who did not in both the MMF/MPA ( P = 0.79) and MTX cohorts ( P = 0.16), there was a numerical trend toward higher geometric mean concentrations in participants who withheld therapy ( Supplemental Table 2 ).
However, at sensitivity analysis excluding those two studies from our analysis, results showed to be consistent with the absence of any significant difference between the two groups, even though a numerical trend emerged in favor of immediate (single-stage) complete revascularization for the composite endpoint of all cause death, repeat revascularization and MI ( Supplementary Fig. 9 ).
Association Between Weight Reduction and PROs Although statistical tests were not conducted, results of these additional exploratory post hoc analyses showed that there was a numerical trend towards improved SF-36v2 Physical and Mental Component Summary scores in participants treated with tirzepatide achieving greater percentage reductions in weight, with participants achieving ≥ 15% weight reduction reporting the greatest improvements in component summary scores (after adjustment for baseline PRO scores) (Fig. 5 a).