Barely Significant
← all phrases

“did not quite reach statistical significance”

680 sentences · 680 papers · 750 search hits before verification · confirmed specimen

Sighted at

p=0.063

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

In the literature

However, additional studies will be needed to confirm the selectivity of this effect, as the group × context interaction did not quite reach statistical significance [Two-way repeated measures ANOVA, No group × context interaction F (1, 9) = 4.04, p = 0.075; no effect of group F (1, 9) = 1.94, p = 0.19].
Furthermore, these patients with dual diagnosis had an increased prevalence of comorbid substance use disorders (82%) relative to patients with no dual diagnosis (62%), but this difference did not quite reach statistical significance ( p = 0.075).
The SIT 17 patients also had lower mean ages when the comparisons were stratified for each of the three regions with the most isolates, but the differences did not quite reach statistical significance (Caracas 35 vs 38.4, p = 0.077; Carabobo 34.5 vs 39.8 p = 0.076; and Amazonas 30.6 vs 39.1, p = 0.056).
a statistical trendp = 0.0771.5× alphagold
However, it should be noted that while in our analysis the early window result is statistically significant, the late window result is supported by a statistical trend that did not quite reach statistical significance (p = 0.077), so a larger study may help confirm the interesting late window finding.
2 ); within the women receiving clodronate, the loss of BMD in those receiving NSAIDs was greater than that observed in those not receiving NSAIDs, though this did not quite reach statistical significance ( p = 0.078) for the total hip.
Exclusion of an extreme outlier (see Fig 6 ) suggests negative correlations between vBMD and age (R = -0.71), and between BW and PI (R = -0.65) as well as a positive correlation between BW and vBMD (R = 0.67) although these associations did not quite reach statistical significance (p<0.08), likely due to limited power of this feasibility study.
Although the change in VL thickness did not quite reach statistical significance ( p = 0.08), the change observed in the present study was close to that reported in other studies at similar locations [ 35 , 54 , 55 ].
The mean age was lowest for women with normal ovarian samples (49 years, range 41 - 57) followed by those with LMP tumors (52 years, range 25 - 76) compared with benign (61 years, range 46 - 69) and invasive tumors (62 years, range 25 - 80), although these differences did not quite reach statistical significance ( p = 0.08, Kruskal-Wallis test).