“near-significant”

During the first minute of playback, time within 5 m ( t = 3.73, P = 0.001), flights ( t = 7.11, P < 0.001), and crosses ( t = 5.78, P < 0.001) significantly increased compared with the baseline period, with a near-significant increase in time within 1 m ( t = 1.98, P = 0.060).

In the 40 Hz tVAS group, attention showed a near-significant improvement ( p = 0.06), and TS 1 and 2 exhibited significant improvements compared to baseline values.

There was a near-significant difference in cold ischemia time with longer times being observed for the ACR group (739 ± 295 vs. 637 ± 302; P = 0.06; Mann-Whitney U test).

Training induced a modest but near-significant decline in body weight and BMI in control subjects (94.7 ± 2.7 to 93.6 ± 2.7 kg and 29.7 ± 0.8 to 29.4 ± 0.8 kg/m 2 , respectively, both P = 0.06), but did not result in significant changes in type 2 diabetic subjects ( Table 1 ).

This difference was significant at T1 ( U = 83, p = .04, ES = 0.37), and similar and near-significant ( U = 89, p = .06) for the overall protocols and protocol VP3.

Nevertheless, AAV5 showed a near-significant difference ( p = 0.06) ( Table 2 ), with the model indicating higher median anti-AAV5 NAb titers in the invasive group compared to the non-invasive group.

[ 93 ] reported a near-significant correlation between baseline NLR and requirement for maintenance IFX ( p = 0.06).

Training duration also predicted some of the distant outcomes: Vocabulary (partial r 2 = .09, p = .02) and Raven's Advanced PM, although only at a near-significant level (partial r 2 = .06, p = .06).

6) showed a near-significant difference ( p = 0.06), which may become significant when increasing the number of subjects [ 94 ].

The CX + LAD group demonstrated the highest mean TpE (2.89 ± 0.92 ms), with near-significant differences when compared to both the CX + RCA (2.25 ± 0.98 ms) and LAD + RCA (2.45 ± 0.96 ms) groups (Bonferroni-corrected Mann-Whitney U test; p = 0.060 and p = 0.0545, respectively).

pH displayed a trend towards significance after adjustment (unadjusted p = 0.113; adjusted p = 0.0502), and bicarbonate also showed a near-significant association ( p = 0.06).

Most findings were either clearly significant or non-significant, and there were few of the borderline and near-significant results that can result from underpowering, with the exception of the 0.3 correlation ( p = 0.06) between Arithmetic Scaled Score and Backward Digit Span, However, it is still possible that some potentially significant associations were not found due to the relatively small sample size and that this may partially explain the limited number of independent predictors found.

[ 24 ], a near-significant reduction in current pelvic pain associated with "Physio-EndEA" was also observed after the intervention (-1.63 [-3.66, 0.02]; P = 0.060).

However, there were near-significant correlations between the HVF area that improved and the number of training sessions performed ( figure 3D , r = 0.3378, t 20 = 1.6, p = 0.06), as well as between area improved and the number of locations trained ( figure 3E , r = 0.3408, t 20 = 0.162, p = 0.06).

There were no significant differences in accuracy between any of the semantic conditions, although there was a near-significant lower accuracy for the social concepts compared with matched-abstract concepts ( t = 1.97, p = 0.06).

In accordance with findings from the voxelwise TOI analyses, mean FA in the left SLF demonstrated a significant positive association with levels of self-reported social anxiety (β = 0.002, p = 0.03) and a near-significant association with levels of FNE (β = 3.67E-04, p = 0.06).

It should be noted, however, that at the 2 min time point, means of salivary acetaldehyde between the groups showed a near-significant difference (p=0.06) which may become significant should the number of study subjects be considerably higher.

The D value at this peak ( D = 1.439) was near-significant ( P = 0.060; post hoc significance test without correction for multiple tests).

In the CAC group, serum phosphorus was significantly higher and PTH showed a near-significant association with CAC (p = 0.06).

Additionally, within-group analysis revealed a near-significant increase from t0 to t2 in the IG (t0 median 17.25, t2 median 23.00, Z =-2.731, p =0.06).

For the seven cohorts (410 patients) with samples collected at mixed or unstated time points, a near-significant and positive correlation was observed ( r = 0.226; 95% CI=[-0.009,0.438]; p = 0.060).

Near-significant p values were found in comparing DFS ( p = 0,06) and Tumour Related Deaths ( p = 0,099) with better outcome for patients in Group B, therefore it is possible to consider patients with only Pancreatic Metastases from RCC, a long-surviving, less-progressing Group.

The regression model combining these three variables resulted in an overall predictive performance of AUC = 0.905 (95% CI: 0.843, 0.966; P < 0.001), which was greater than the AUC of ΔADC 200,1000 alone, with a near-significant difference ( P = 0.060) (Fig. 5 ).

2 A, all tested cell lines demonstrated increased DT under hypoxia, with FaDu and Detroit-562 showing significantly delayed proliferation, while 2A3 cells exhibited a near-significant change ( p = 0.06).

When we re-examined the time window 350–450 ms for the 23 subjects in the test phase, with Group as between-subjects variable, we observed, besides the significant interaction of Familiarity × Quadrant ( F 3,63 = 5.53, p = 0.003), two interactions with the factor Group: a significant Familiarity × Group ( F 1,21 = 24.3, p < 0.001), and a near-significant three-way Familiarity × Quadrant × Group ( F 3,63 = 2.67, p = 0.06).