Barely Significant
← all excerpts

Comparison of two devices and two breathing patterns for exhaled breath condensate sampling.

PLoS One · 2011 · PMC3210176 · PMID 22087323

2
hedged sentences
0.0560
closest p · 1.1× alpha
0.0560
boldest claim

The sentences

did not reach statistical significancep = 0.056so close (0.05 < p ≤ 0.1)
Within the same device, hyperventilation yielded higher volumes of EBC than tidal breathing: Using the RTube we obtained 2.11 ml±0.07 ml with hyperventilation and 1.51 ml±0.09 ml with tidal breathing ( p <0.0001; figure 1a , white bars) and using the ECoScreen we obtained 1.37 ml±0.12 ml with hyperventilation and 1.05 ml±0.09 ml with tidal breathing although this difference did not reach statistical significance ( p = 0.056; figure 1a , grey bars).

also in 111,027 other papers

showed a trendno p-value reported
The ECoScreen showed a trend towards higher total protein amounts.

also in 53,322 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.