“a statistical trend”

To identify predictors independently associated with the prognosis, we performed multivariate logistic regression analysis with variables that had shown a statistical trend ( p < 0.1) in univariate analysis.

Participants with a positive TST exhibited a statistical trend towards a higher rate of BCG vaccination than patients who tested negative (34 vs. 25 %, p = 0.10).

For both the ABI and the PVR, there was a statistical trend ( p < 0.10) towards better results in the intervention group compared to the control group, but the results were not statistically significantly different between the two groups during the 12 months of follow-up ( p = 0.061 and p = 0.077, respectively) ( Figure 3 ). 3.3.

In female students only, we found a statistical trend for this decline ( t = −1.70, p < .1).

Statistical significance was defined as P < 0.05, while a statistical trend was defined as 0.05 ≤ P < 0.10.

Statistical significance was accepted at p < 0.05, while a statistical trend was considered when 0.05 ≤ p < 0.10.

Three out of 10 mice injected with HCT116‐∆Np73 presented lung metastasis versus none of the control mice, showing a statistical trend ( P = 0.1; by the Fisher's exact test).

However, there was a statistical trend (0.05 ≤ p < 0.10) that affected respondents with high levels of PTSD symptoms ( n = 36) more often had high levels of loneliness than non-affected respondents.

Examination of the second pre-performance condition showed a statistical trend ( p = 0.1) for a positive association between LFms 2 activity and flow.

Only subparts showing at least a statistical trend ( p < 0.1) with one of these sleep metrics were retained for the subsequent DCM analyses, ensuring that connectivity analyses focused on hypothalamic regions most likely to be functionally relevant to our sleep measures of interest.

Between-group differences for achievement of PGA ≤ 1 at 6 months was assessed with univariate logistic regression; multivariate logistic regression adjusted for potential confounders (baseline variables showing a statistical trend, specifically P < 0.10, in the between-group comparison).

Of those, 256 (79%) found only significant positive associations between R/S and well-being (including eight studies at a statistical trend level, that is, 0.05 < P < 0.10).

In addition, parameters such as HGB (g/dL) and eosinophil counts (μL) exhibited a statistical trend (p < 0.10), suggesting potential physiological adaptations over time.

First, univariate analyses were performed to screen for variables showing a statistical trend ( P < 0.10) between the willingness groups.

They found a statistical trend towards a higher number of events in the ≥50% dose relative to the <50 dose group (54.2% vs. 50.8%, P = 0.10). 22 In a similar line, we found a poorer outcome among those CCS patients on the higher beta-blocker dose relative to dose not on beta-blocker.

This was a statistical trend at p < 0.1.

Significance was defined at p ≤ 0.05 and a statistical trend at p ≤ 0.10.

A probability (p) value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant, whereas differences were considered to show a statistical trend when 0.05<p<0.10.

We demonstrated by sensitivity analyses that by removing these two studies only a statistical trend (p < 0.1) of the effect of hypnosis/guided imagery on pain at final treatment was detectable.

If a factor was showed evidence of a statistical trend at p < 0.1 in the univariate models, the variable was included in the multivariate, age-adjusted model.

There was a significant multivariate effect of group (Wilks’s Lambda = 0.86), F (2, 66) = 5.28, p < 0.01, η 2 p = 0.14, 90% CI (0.02–0.25) which was reflected in a significant univariate group effect for negative words ( F [1,67] = 7.86, p < 0.01, η 2 p = 0.11, 90% CI [0.02–0.23]) and a statistical trend for positive words ( F [1,67] = 3.52, p < 0.1, η 2 p = 0.05, 90% CI [0.00–0.15]).

Values were considered statistically different at P ≤ 0.05 and considered a statistical trend at P < 0.1.

To identify measures independently associated with unfavorable outcome at 3 months, peak EED distance and early EED increase up to day 3, we calculated linear regression and stepwise forward inclusion multivariable logistic regression models including relevant measures showing a statistical trend ( p < 0.1) in prior univariate testing.

Amyloid-β protein precursor (AβPP) was increased by 2,4,5-T and 2,4-D, and 2,4,5-T caused a statistical trend (0.05 < p<0.10) increase in Aβ.

At 12 months, promoters in Group 3 also displayed mostly better PROM scores than detractors, however, these differences were only significant for very few PROM scores (Tables 5 and 6 : Pain intensity at 12 months), while a slightly higher number showed a statistical trend (0.05 < p < 0.1), e.g.