Barely Significant
← all phrases

“a trend toward significance”

3,730 sentences · 3,730 papers · 5,089 search hits before verification

In the literature

a trend toward significanceP = .061.2× alpha
In the multivariable analysis (n = 197) shown in Table 2 , only CHF (HR, 5.06; 95% CI, 1.45-17.64; P = .05) and LAE (HR, 3.32; 95% CI, 1.34, 8.19; P = .009) were associated with an increased likelihood of detecting AF during 12 months of monitoring, with a trend toward significance for QRS duration (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00-1.04; P = .06).
a trend toward significanceP = 0.061.2× alpha
Comparison of sensitivity by setting where the test was ordered did not reveal a significant difference for patients whose test results were received before discharge, although there was a trend toward significance ( P = 0.06).
In sensitivity analysis, excluding persons with undiagnosed diabetes who were initiated on glucose-lowering therapies during follow-up (excluding 15 men and 18 women), we found that the association was more significant for FPG (−0.49±0.19 kg per SD increase, p=0.01; SD=13 mg/dL) and grip strength, with a trend toward significance for 2HG (−0.40±0.21 kg per SD increase, p=0.06; SD=42 mg/dL), among men in fully adjusted models, compared with the primary analysis.
a trend toward significancep = 0.061.2× alpha
Despite the lack of an interaction, we tested for statistical significance between backward and forward conditions for each stage and found that only the difference at the late stage shows a trend toward significance (late, p = 0.06, with numerically stronger coupling in the backward condition than forward condition), but not with the other two stages (early, p = 0.92; mid, p = 0.78).
a trend toward significancep = 0.061.2× alpha
Thus, while controls showed differentiation between Show and No-Show events in the Human Opponent runs as expected (this difference in the Computer Opponent runs showed significance on the right MTG: t = 2.62, p = 0.01 and only a trend toward significance on the left ( t = 2.04, p = 0.06)), ASD subjects showed no differentiation between the Human Show and No-Show conditions with a much weaker main effect of Opponent Type (due to a differentiation between the Computer Show and No-Show events; see Fig. 3 C and D). 3.2.3.
The two‐way ANOVA for differences in connectivity directional asymmetry indicated that there was a main effect of frequency ( F (4.58,105.24) = 2.89, p =.003), no effect of group ( F (1,23) = 0.75, p =.109), and a trend toward significance in the interaction effect between frequency and group ( F (2.26,105.24) = 4.58, p =.06).
a trend toward significancep = 0.061.2× alpha
Patients with ESW were significantly older [median age, 54.0 (28.0, 67.0) years] than those with LSW [median age, 50.0 (17.0, 65.0) years], had a lower incidence of rejection within the first nine months after OLT (1 (2.7%) compared to 19 (26.4%); p = 0.01), and had a trend toward significance difference in the etiology of the liver disease ( p = 0.06), primarily due to a lower prevalence of autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) [0 compared to 8 (11.1%)] and primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) (2 (5.4%) compared to 13 (18.1%)).