Barely Significant
← all phrases

“approaching significance”

2,641 sentences · 2,641 papers · 3,385 search hits before verification · confirmed specimen

Sighted at

p=0.09

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

In the literature

approaching significanceP = 0.061.2× alphagold
With RET, there was a main effect of time (P < 0.001) (interaction: P = 0.3) with a significant increase in MPS in PLA (1.44 ± 0.09%.d −1 (P < 0.01, 95% CI [0.11, 0.48], d = 1.13) and approaching significance with n-3 PUFA (1.44 ± 0.072%.d −1 (P = 0.06, 95% CI [−0.005, 0.37], d = 1.20).
approaching significancep = 0.061.2× alphagold
Meanwhile, middle-to-higher-income Latino(a) parents, in comparison with White parents, reported significantly more changes in appreciation of life (95% CI Mdifference [0.16, 1.25], p < 0.01), improved relationships (95% CI Mdifference [0.16, 1.13], p < 0.01), and new possibilities (95% CI Mdifference [0.15, 1.16], p < 0.01), as well as more changes in personal strength that was approaching significance (95% CI Mdifference [−0.02, 1.12], p = 0.06).
approaching significancep = 0.061.2× alphagold
Notably, scores for this subgroup were higher overall in the HOT compared to the CONTROL trial (main effect for trial approaching significance; p = 0.06), with moderate to large ES found between trials at baseline, 60, 90 and 120 min ( d = 0.83 [-0.17, 1.75] to 1.81 [0.64, 2.81]).
approaching significanceP = .061.2× alphagold
Post‐LPS FAIR ASL liver perfusion response differences were observed between sham/BDL rats ( P = .02), approaching significance in sham (+78 ± 33 ml/min/100 g; P = .06) but not BDL rats (−49 ± 40 ml/min/100 g; P = .47).
approaching significancep = .0601.2× alphagold
In the women sample, a significant effect of conscientiousness on pop-out versus conjunction search was revealed, F (1, 38) = 4.15, p = .050, η 2 = .12. The follow-up of the significant interaction with a sex-split (compare groups) MANOVA with conscientiousness as a dichotomous between-subject variable as expected showed no significant effects of conscientiousness in men, p s > .162, while in women, the three-way interaction of pop-out versus conjunction by target absent/present by conscientiousness was approaching significance, F (1, 38) = 3.77, p = .060, η 2 = .09.
approaching significancep = 0.061.2× alphagold
Control IntCB 1 +/+ mice displayed robust preferences for WD when compared to SD, an effect largely absent in IntCB 1 −/− mice by 3 h ( Figure 5 a, from 92.8 ± 2.8% total kcals from WD in IntCB 1 +/+ mice compared to 46.5 ± 12.5% in IntCB 1 −/− mice; p = 0.029), and approaching significance during the 3–6 h interval ( Figure 5 b, from 96.2 ± 3.8% total kcals from WD in IntCB 1 +/+ mice compared to 46.9 ± 16.5% in IntCB 1 −/− mice; p = 0.06).
approaching significanceP = 0.061.2× alphagold
PGLYRP4 exon 2, c.37A>C Ile13Leu, exon 6 c.575G>T Gly188Val, and exon 9, c.*416A>C, UTR variants may associate with CD or with gender in CD patients PGLYRP4 exon 2, c.37A>C, Ile13Leu (SNP rs30006458), was differentially distributed in CD females compared with CD males and the AA genotype was approaching significance ( P = 0.06, Table S16 ).