Barely Significant
← all phrases

“nearly significant”

3,288 sentences · 3,288 papers · 3,853 search hits before verification · confirmed specimen

Sighted at

p=0.0579p=0.06

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

In the literature

nearly significantp =0.0511.0× alphagold
The relative expression of β 1 -adrenergic receptor across females in experiment 1 as quantified by qPCR and normalized to the lowest average group expression (LS : FF : SS : AA, 1 : 6.7 : 4.3 : 6.4) mirrors that quantified using microarray hybridizations (1 : 1.9 : 1.4 : 1.8; see above) and the difference across group mean expression is nearly significant (Kruskal–Wallis (K–W) test=7.77, p =0.051).
nearly significantP = .0511.0× alphagold
Functional scores in the Latarjet group were better than those in the ABR group; the Latarjet group showed a nearly significant advantage in the mean ASES score (91.2 vs 86.0, respectively; P = .051) and significant differences in factors, such as lifting weights, throwing a ball, and sports activity ( P = .004, .007, and .01, respectively) ( Figure 2 ).
nearly significantp = 0.0511.0× alphagold
In addition, a nearly significant and positive three-way interaction of (group [Active tACS] × session [3]) × MoCA (beta = 3.26, 95% CI [− 0.01, 6.53], t(811) = 1.95, p = 0.051; Std. beta = 0.11, 95% CI [− 4.65e−04, 0.23]) indicated higher offline visuomotor learning 3 months after treatment in participants with lower MoCA from the active tACS group compared to those from the sham tACS group (Fig. 4 b).
nearly significantP = 0.0511.0× alphagold
Interactions For strength, the interaction between treatment and training status was nearly significant (P = 0.051), but post hoc comparisons between treatment and control within each training status classification were not significant (adjusted P = 0.47 for difference within non-experienced groups, and adjusted P = 0.99 for difference within experienced groups).
nearly significantp = 0.0511.0× alphagold
There is a nearly significant reduction of pulmonary haemorrhage with the use of 200 mg/kg poractant-α (Fig. 4 c: p = 0.051), while this reduction becomes significant when analysis was done pooling together patients receiving different doses of poractant-α (Fig. 4 d: p = 0.038).
nearly significantp = 0.0511.0× alphagold
There were also some nearly significant interactions between rater sex and the attractiveness manipulation, F (3,111) = 2.676, p = 0.051, η 2 ρ = 0.067, η 2 = 0.018, and between rater sex and pitch, F (4,148) = 2.132, p = 0.080, η 2 ρ = 0.054, η 2 = 0.003, providing some evidence that male and female raters were affected in different ways by the attractiveness and pitch manipulations.