Barely Significant
← all phrases

“just failed to reach statistical significance”

204 sentences · 204 papers · 232 search hits before verification · confirmed specimen

Sighted at

p=0.06

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

In the literature

After three days, for the first CT1 mutant line ( SLC6A8 Δex10-11/y ), we observed a 3.5-fold increase in intracellular creatine although this increase just failed to reach statistical significance ( Fig 4C , 4.2 vs 1.2 nmoles/mg protein relative to empty vector controls, P = 0.061, two-sided t-test).
A closer examination of larval development in venous and diabetic wounds after 48 and 72 h treatment showed that survival in venous ulcers was on average 19% lower than in diabetic wounds, but the etiology of the wound just failed to reach statistical significance at the 95% level (wound type: F = 3.7243, df = 1, 37, P = 0.0613; duration of treatment: F = 1.5662, df = 1, 37, P = 0.2186; interaction: F = 0.040, df = 1, 37; P = 0.8427).
At 6 years after surgery, the estimated freedom from thromboembolic complications was higher in the LAAO group, 96.7 % (95 % CI 95.6–97.9 %) and 95.2 % (95 % CI 93.8–96.6 %) for the LAAO and no LAAO groups, respectively, but the difference just failed to reach statistical significance ( p = 0.063).
However, on subgroup analysis when tumours were separated into otherwise low-risk or high-risk PTCs, the presence of TC-PTC by three criteria (2 × and 50%, 3 × and 30%, and 3 × and 50%) was statistically significant in low-risk patients ( p = 0.049, p = 0.004, and p = 0.004, respectively) and the criteria of 2 × and 30% just failed to reach statistical significance ( p = 0.063).
The odds of a medication administration error occurring were higher in residential care than in nursing care residents; however, this just failed to reach statistical significance at the 5% level (adjusted OR 1.77, 95% CI 0.96 to 3.25, p = 0.063; adjusted for age, sex and medication delivery system).
Interestingly, model 6 at T8 (not shown) excluded TME-Back and replaced it with TME-Abdominals and BMI, but these two variables just failed to reach statistical significance (P = 0.064 and 0.065, respectively).
a statistical trendp =0.0751.5× alphagold
Between-Group Effects The between-group analysis revealed a group difference favoring CS which just failed to reach statistical significance for the CERAD total score ( p =0.067; r = 0.43) with a moderate effect size, and also a statistical trend for the NPI total score ( p =0.075; r = 0.42), again with a moderate effect size.
For phase two, The Newcastle scale gave the same sensitivity (97%) as the Benamer scale and improved specificity (100% vs 80%), although this difference just failed to reach statistical significance ( p = 0.07). 3.2 Scale applicability and inter-operator reliability For the Newcastle scale, results from phase one and two were combined ( n = 112) and the ICC values were: 0.83, 0.94, 0.81, 0.92 and 0.93, for the right caudate, right putamen, left caudate, left putamen and total scores respectively.