Barely Significant
← all phrases

“a strong trend”

5,726 sentences · 5,726 papers · 7,352 search hits before verification · confirmed specimen

Sighted at

p=0.077

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

In the literature

As expected, the wound closure rate of diabetic rats was significantly delayed compared with non-diabetics; Gal-3 significantly promoted wound healing 3 days and 9 days after application, which was comparable to that of non-diabetic rats and Comfeel® dressing; VEGF showed a strong trend of accelerated skin wound healing, albeit without statistical significance (Supplementary Fig. 6F ).
25 The co-primary end points of this trial were radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) and OS, which was met for rPFS, showing benefit in the abirater-one group (16.5 months versus 8.2 months, P <0.0001) but not for OS, though a strong trend toward improved survival was seen, but did not cross the O’Brien-Fleming efficacy boundary for statistical significance or the pre-specified statistical efficacy boundary (alpha-level: 0.0035). 26 Similar to the earlier study, unblinding was carried out after interim analysis and cross-over was allowed.
Finally, among RA participants with anti–COL2A1‐885B (whose anticollagen multireactivity mirrored that of serum; Figure 3 ), those with multireactive sera had a strong trend of more frequently having DQA1*01:02 than those with limited reactivity sera.
Principal component analysis of relative metabolite abundance per cell revealed a strong trend across the 54 cell lines (PC1, 58.9% explained variance, Supplementary Fig. 2 ), which strongly correlates with cell line volumes derived from cell diameters measured in ref. 66 as well as with the herein determined adherent cell size area (Supplementary Fig. 2 , see Supplementary Note).
Consistent with our conclusion, there was a strong trend toward higher counts of peripheral basophils, tissue-infiltrating basophils, and tissue-infiltrating M2 macrophages in the non-responder group than in the responder group (p = 0.0333, p = 0.0007, and p = 0.0066, respectively) (Fig. 5 b).