borderline significantp = 0.05
Within-group analysis showed a borderline significant improvement in the sham group ( p = 0.05) and a trend toward improvement in the real tDCS group ( p = 0.06).
Within-group analysis showed a borderline significant improvement in the sham group ( p = 0.05) and a trend toward improvement in the real tDCS group ( p = 0.06).
Although the reduction in the active tDCS group was not statistically significant within the group ( p = 0.30), the sham group demonstrated a near-significant increase in anxiety levels ( p = 0.053).
Although the active group demonstrated a stronger reduction, the difference between groups did not reach statistical significance ( p = 0.063).
It is also worth noting that several studies reported improvements that approached significance or trended in a favorable direction.