“a trend toward significance”

Differences were acknowledged statistically significant at a P value of <0.05, and a P value of >0.05 and <0.1 was considered a trend toward significance.

However, because the p -value indicated a trend toward significance, we conducted further post testing and pairwise t-tests as exploratory analyses to further examine potential group differences.

Interaction analysis between this value with gender, however, showed only a trend toward significance, suggesting a potentially small effect size for the interaction that is underpowered to detect with the current sample size.

Second, the relatively small sample size may limit the interpretation of the results; some variables with a trend toward significance may show significant associations in analyses with larger sample sizes.

In multivariate analysis, only elevated serum IgM (HR 1.09) remained an independent predictor of shorter TTP, whereas cytogenetic abnormalities showed only a trend toward significance (HR 2.4).

Significant differences between the groups were discovered in the dDG in amplicon_005_CpG_4 ( p < 0.05), while pairwise comparison revealed only a trend toward significance.

52.5%, P > 0.05), so the number of chemotherapy cycles positively correlated with the total chemotherapy doses and the frequencies of chemotherapy delays positively correlated with chemotherapy intervals. Analysis of prognostic factors of survival Univariable analysis showed that stage ( P = 0.071) and number of chemotherapy cycles ( P = 0.058) showed a trend toward significance for EFS.

[ 22 ] reported that IV CM is a nephrotoxic risk factor for patients with eGFR levels consistently < 30 mL/min/1.73 m 2 , with a trend toward significance at 30–44 mL/min/1.73 m 2 .

Several other genes in the chr14q32.3 amplicon in BL2 such as CLBA1 also predicted poor clinical outcome in the test cohort but only showed a trend toward significance in the validation cohort (Supplemental Fig. 8B,C ).

Because a p -value does not measure the size of an effect or the importance of a result [ 46 , 47 ], the significance value of p ≈ 0.05 was considered a sufficient strength of evidence against the null hypothesis, and therefore a trend toward significance.

A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant, and a p-value of less than 0.1 was considered a trend toward significance.

Differences were declared significant at P < 0.05, and a value of P ≤ 0.10 was considered to reflect a trend toward significance.

Variables that showed statistical significance or a trend toward significance included age, male sex, diabetes mellitus, dyslipidemia, cerebrovascular disease, atrial fibrillation, NEWS2 score, spinning/whirling sensation, positional vertigo/dizziness, continuous dizziness, symptom duration, D-dimer level, anticoagulant group, and dual antiplatelet therapy group.

Statistical significance was noted when p -values were less than 0.05, and a trend toward significance was noted when p -values were 0.05–0.06.

This was observed in the meta-regression, since newer articles on this topic showed a trend toward significance for R/S as a protective factor (r = -0.152), unlike older articles (r = 0.060).

Site-Stratified analysis showed that reductions > 59.6% in peritoneal implants (sensitivity 71.4%, specificity 95.7%, AUC 0.905, 95% CI: 0.821–0.989, P < 0.05), > 63.95% in metastatic lymph nodes (sensitivity 72.7%, specificity 94.4%, AUC 0.904, 95% CI: 0.815–0.994, P < 0.05) predicted pCR at respective sites, and reductions > 73.9% in primary lesions (sensitivity 100%, specificity 78.9%, AUC 0.816, 95% CI: 0.642–0.990, P = 0.151) predicted a trend toward significance in pCR results.

p-values less than 0.05 were considered significant, and p-values of 0.05 to 0.10 were considered to indicate a trend toward significance.

Though the NDMI 450 score was not statistically significant in either of these datasets, there was a trend toward significance in the 450K dataset.

Three studies found significant differences in mood at a 10-mg dose ( Alvarez et al., 2012 ; Henigsberg et al., 2012 ; McIntyre et al., 2014 ); however, two only found a trend toward significance at this dosage ( Jacobsen et al., 2015 ; Mahableshwarkar et al., 2015 ).

Despite not being statistically significant, the increase was very close to the significance value (i.e., 0.05), hence showing a trend toward significance.

Decreased baseline ejection fraction was not included because of missing data >5% but was significant in the univariable model, suggesting a trend toward significance.

Furthermore, a significant group effect and the interaction effect of group by time with a trend toward significance were detected in epinephrine levels: The KRG group showed a trend to decreasing epinephrine after treatment, whereas the placebo group showed increased epinephrine.

The current study also did not find a difference in the duration of opioid use or MMEs prescribed although, with the larger numbers in this study, there was a trend toward significance in the subset of patients who underwent TKA.

Although this result was not statistically significant, there was a trend toward significance ( P for trend<0.001; Table S3 ).

As a result, the significance of 3 replicates may not be conclusive initially, but there was a trend toward significance.