Barely Significant
← all phrases

“a trend towards significance”

2,761 sentences · 2,761 papers · 3,605 search hits before verification

In the literature

5.31; p<0.0001), indicative of poorer glycemic control, despite similar maternal age and parity (p>0.3); furthermore, while triglyceride levels showed a trend towards significance (p=0.068), high-density lipoprotein (HDL) levels were significantly lower in the GDM group (44.55±5.85 mg/dL vs. 46.55±5.76 mg/dL; p=0.0159), suggesting early dyslipidemia and highlighting the distinct metabolic baseline of women with GDM during pregnancy.
a trend towards significanceP = 0.0681.4× alpha
Group differences were also detected on HADS anxiety score however, due to insufficient power for the medium effect size evident a post hoc analysis failed to identify significant group differences, with a trend towards significance between the a-MCI+ and Control group ( P = 0.068).
a trend towards significancep = 0.0681.4× alpha
Diastolic circumferential strain rate was impaired in women with suspected CMD compared to controls with a trend towards significance (106.1 ± 26 vs 126.2 ± 37%/s, p = 0.068), consistent with and expanding previous work with tissue tagging in women with suspected CMD.
45 Surprisingly, men were set more aggressive targets than women (p=0.026; Figure 2 ), whereas setting targets according to the frailty status demonstrated only a trend towards significance (p=0.068). 46 In non-frail patients, the baseline weight predicted a less aggressive glycaemic target setting (p=0.012), while astonishingly, glycaemic targets were not adjusted according to the body weight in frail patients (p=0.725; Figure 3 ). 46 The INTERVAL study was conducted before any national guidelines advocated individualising therapeutic goals.
a trend towards significancep =0.0681.4× alpha
The BDI scores also showed a difference among groups ( F 2, 188 =32.814, p =0.040) as a consequence of significantly higher values in the “naive group” than in the “add-on group” (“naive group”: 9.0±7.9, “add-on group”: 6.0±5.7; p =0.040) and a trend towards significance in the comparison between the “naive group” and the “switched group” (“naive group”: 9.0±7.9, “switched group”: 5.8±4.9; p =0.068).