Barely Significant
← all phrases

“close to significance”

2,131 sentences · 2,131 papers · 2,937 search hits before verification

In the literature

close to significancep =0.0571.1× alpha
Among the 10 patients that were assessed for 6MMP:6TG ratio, all had lower average 6MMP:6TGN ratios after allopurinol compared to before allopurinol; the percentage of weeks that goal 6MMP:6TGN ratio (<40) were maintained were statistically significant in 6 patients ( p <0.05) and close to significance in 2 other patients ( p =0.057).
close to significancep = 0.0571.1× alpha
At the same time, MYO was significantly more present in individuals with the presence of at least one R allele in the recessive model ( p = 0.019/ES = 0.409) but only close to significance in the genotype model ( p = 0.057/ES = 0.129).
close to significancep = 0.05721.1× alpha
In L condition both cost indexes (JI and TC) do not differ between arms and movement directions; on the contrary, significant differences can be observed for both JI and TC during high speed trials: anova tests showed a significant effect of “used arm” on TC in H condition (p = 0.0293), and a non-significant effect, but close to significance, on JI (p = 0.0572); moreover, both indexes showed a statistically significant effect of “movement direction” (p < 0.05 for JI and p < 0.01 for TC), while the effect of the interaction “used arm” x “movement direction” is not statistically significant.
Although we observed a marginally significant tendency for breakpoints to cluster at sites where TOX had a strongly predicted secondary structure but TYX did not ( p = 0.0579; Table S2 ), it is important to stress that we performed three separate tests and that we would have expected an approximately one in six chance of finding at least one p -value this close to significance even in the absence of any real associations.
close to significancep = 0.0581.2× alpha
Mean estimates from the mixed model revealed significant preferential attention to upright biological motion at 3 months (M = 56.4%, 95% CI [52.3–60.5%], p < 0.01), at 5 months (M = 55.4%, 95% CI [51.6–59.1%], p < 0.01), at 9 months (M = 56.6%, 95% CI [52.0–61.1%], p < 0.01), at 15 months (M = 61.8%, 95% CI [58.2–65.4%], p < 0.001), and at 24 months (M = 64.1%, 95% CI [60.5–67.6%], p < 0.001), with preference close to significance at 4 months (M = 53.8%, 95% CI [50.0–57.7%], p = 0.058) (all p -values adjusted for multiple comparisons (7 total) using the Benjamini-Hochberg method 54 , with a false discovery rate of 5%).