“a statistical trend”

Consecutively, parameters reaching a statistical trend in univariate analysis (that is, P < 0.1) were included into the multivariate models.

At 1 h after consumption of a single dose of 600 mg, the difference in the number of circulating monocytes ( Figure 2 A) was lower than at 1 h after consuming the placebo, reaching a statistical trend ( p < 0.1), suggesting an increased trafficking of monocytes into tissue.

Effects were considered significant when P ≤ 0.050 and a statistical trend when P ≤ 0.100.

The MAR results were not statistically significant, while the VIR index showed a statistical trend for the relation between condition and bacteria ( p = 0.10), since the isolates from the positive control and from the RMS supplemented with 2.5% biochar had a significantly lower VIR index than those from the RMS supplemented with 5% and 10% biochar.

This finding showed a statistical trend (p < 0.1) in the two highest doses.

Variables demonstrating a statistical trend towards significance ( P < 0.1) in these univariate analyses, and deemed theoretically relevant, were selected for inclusion in the subsequent multivariable models.

Parameters showing a statistical trend (defined as p < 0.1) in the univariable analysis were entered in multivariable GEE models; stepwise backward variable selection was used to derive a parsimonious model.

The results for three moderators showed a statistical trend ( P < 0.10).

There was also a statistical trend for higher concentrations of N and S in RB horses than in RS horses ( P < 0.1, Table 1 ).

The result of a statistical test was considered significant for p < 0.05, and a statistical trend for p < 0.10.

None of the other target variables, including smoking (failure rate: 6.8%; p = 0.484) and diabetes (failure rate: 5.3%; p = 0.977), reached a level of statistical significance or a statistical trend ( p > 0.100).

Three other monotherapies (STR, IMI, and DOR) and the CEF+DOR combination showed a statistical trend ( P < 0.1) toward lower relative growth rates ( supplementary table S3 , Supplementary Material online), possibly indicating that some monotherapies more often lead to an evolutionary trade-off than drug combinations.

Statistical significance (p<0.05) is denoted by an asterisk (*), while a statistical trend (0.05<p<0.1) is denoted by a hash symbol (#).

To determine the effect of any single patient variable compared to others, logistic regression was performed, and significance ( p < 0.05) or a statistical trend ( p < 0.10) was established.

In addition, there was a statistical trend towards patients with schizophrenia being more likely to decline examination (p = 0.10) and decline treatment (p = 0.09) compared to PHCs, while being offered examination and being offered treatment both contributed statistically insignificantly to the overall discrepancy between the two patient groups.

However, an interesting numerical difference supported by a statistical trend was found between sexes in the codeine containing paracetamol 1000 mg/codeine 60 mg ( p = 0.10) and ibuprofen 400 mg/paracetamol 1000 mg/codeine 60 mg ( p = 0.14) groups where females score numerically higher SPI than males (Table 1 ).

For instance, clinically node-positive (cN + ) disease, a well-recognized adverse prognostic factor, was more frequent in the HVC group (72% vs 61%; P = .002), and although this difference attenuated to a statistical trend ( P = .10) after adjustment, the directional imbalance suggests that HVCs treated patients with more advanced nodal disease.

For IS, the difference between both light groups changed from statistical significance to a statistical trend (p = 0.1) and sleep fragmentation became worse in men than in women, with lower SE and shorter sleep duration (main effect of SEX; F 1,50 > 4.47; p < 0.04). 3.2.

Parameters showing a statistical trend ( p < 0.1) or being proved a significant association in previous studies were included in a logistic model to identify parameters independently associated with functional outcome.

Variables with a statistical trend ( p < 0.1) in a univariable model were included in the final multivariable model.

A statistical trend was considered when 0.05 < P ≤ 0.10.

Post‐hoc t‐tests revealed either a significantly lower ( p < 0.05 after FDR‐correction) or a statistical trend toward lower anisotropy ( p < 0.1 after FDR correction) in patients compared to controls for all sub‐tracts confirming that anisotropy was systematically reduced in patients.

In late stage AIDS patients (treated group baseline mean CD4 = 49.9), a statistical trend ( P = 0.10) in eduction of C-reactive protein levels was noted compared with the placebo group (baseline mean CD4 = 55).

A statistical trend ( p < 0.10) was found for higher RMS sway in the no FXTAS group than controls in the following five additional conditions: (1) FTEO ST, firm ( p = 0.0795), (2) FTEC ST, firm ( p = 0.0706, (3) FAEC DT, firm ( p = 0.076), (4) FTEO DT, firm ( p = 0.0682), and (5) FTEO, foam ( p = 0.0537).

The linear term remained significant if we removed group BWE, KUY, or UGE; it became a statistical trend (0.05 < p < 0.10) if we removed group INS, ISA, NTA, TIT, or URU; and the p-value increased to 0.57 if we removed the largest group.