Barely Significant
← all phrases

“close to being significant”

275 sentences · 275 papers · 343 search hits before verification · confirmed specimen

Sighted at

p=0.06

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

In the literature

close to being significantp = 0.0631.3× alphagold
In this sense, the control group did not show statistically significant differences in any of the variables between the pre-test and the post-test; only personal responsibility was close to being significant ( p = 0.063), and all values of the d-Cohen effect were <0.2.
close to being significantp = 0.0641.3× alphagold
We observed a tendency for a reduction in gliosis after RD2 treatment, which was close to being significant in the cortex of RD2-treated mice (Fig. 2 b; GFAP staining: unpaired one-tailed Student’s t test, cortex n.s. p = 0.064, hippocampus n.s. p = 0.3) (Fig. 2 c; CD11b staining: unpaired one-tailed Student’s t test, cortex n.s. p = 0.051, hippocampus n.s. p = 0.28).
close to being significantP = 0.0671.3× alphagold
In univariate Cox regression analysis two of the gene lists were significant in predicting breast cancer survival (15/21 genes: relative risk (RR) 3.70, 95%CI 1.64 to 8.34, P = 0.0007; 63/76 genes: RR 2.24, 95%CI 1.09–4.61, P = 0.028), while the third was close to being significant despite the limited number of overlapping genes (26/70 genes: RR 1.99, 95%CI 0.93 to 4.26, P = 0.067).
close to being significantp = 0.071.4× alphagold
Somewhat consistent with these findings, non‐atherosclerotic Pfn1 +/−(EC) mice also exhibited a sign of elevated circulating B cells relative to Pfn1 +/+ mice with the p ‐value close to being significant ( p = 0.07); however, a reverse trend was found when splenic B cell content was compared between the two groups of animals in non‐atherosclerosis setting (Figure S2 ).
close to being significantp = 0.071.4× alphagold
ii) Patients who took the medication more than 24 months had the OR of 10.91 (95% CI: 0.83–144.02) of developing MRONJ, and the association was close to being significant ( p = 0.07). iii) Patients who were on multiple combined drugs had 0.17 times the likelihood of developing MRONJ [OR 0.17(95% CI: 0.01–2.36), p = 0.19]. iv) The odds ratio was similar between having a dental extraction and no dental extraction in association with MRONJ [OR 1.15, 95% CI: 0.21–6.43), p = 0.88].
close to being significantp = 0.071.4× alphagold
In the multivariate analysis with the adjustment for the parameters (gestational age, birth weight and total ventilation time), the observed difference between the two groups was no longer significant, however close to being significant ( p = 0.07) ( Supplemental Figure S1 ).