Rehabilitation of executive functioning in patients with frontal lobe brain damage with goal management training.

Front Hum Neurosci · 2011 · PMC3043269 · PMID 21369362

Europe PMC DOI

hedged sentences

0.0600

closest p · 1.2× alpha

0.0700

boldest claim

The sentences

marginally significantp < .06so close (0.05 < p ≤ 0.1)

follow-up, t (9) = 2.355, p < 0.05, d = 0.78 (see Table 3 ).There was a marginally significant main effect of Session for coefficient of variation of SART response times at baseline vs. follow-up, F (1,15) = 4.279, p < .06, η p 2 = 0.222 , that was accounted for by the GMT group, t (9) = 2.410, p < 0.04, d = 0.993 (see Table 3 ; Figure 1 , top right).

also in 26,082 other papers

approached significancep < 0.07so close (0.05 < p ≤ 0.1)

Tower test There were no reliable interactions on the D–KEFs Tower Test, although the Group × Session interaction for the achievement score approached significance at baseline vs. follow-up, F (1,16) = 3.942, p < 0.07, η p 2 = 0.222.

also in 8,237 other papers

Quoted from the open-access full text in Europe PMC under the licence the publisher applied. The sentence is reproduced exactly as published; the emphasis is ours.