Barely Significant

Excerpts

8,476 sentences · 1 filter applied

moderately significantp -value < 0.051.0× alphaqualifiedgold
On the other hand, when we used the ACh stimulation protocol ( Figure 2 e–h), the average distance between DBH centroids and the nearest α3β4 nAChR centroids (184.0 ± 50.2 nm) was not only significantly lower than the average one when compared with a random simulation for α3β4 nAChR structures (605.7 ± 9.7 nm; p -value < 0.0001, Figure 2 i), but also showed a moderately significant average distance reduction to that obtained for the K + stimulated assays ( p -value < 0.05).
a decreasing trendp > 0.051.0× alphagold
In JB6 cells, the administration of 20 μg/mL and 40 μg/mL LQ interventions significantly decreased the level of TNF-α ( p < 0.05) ( Figure 3 D); the administration of 40 μg/mL LQ interventions significantly decreased the level of IL-1β ( p < 0.05) ( Figure 3 E); and the administration of LQ interventions failed to significantly decrease the level of IL-6, but it also followed an increase in dose and showed a decreasing trend ( p > 0.05) ( Figure 3 F). 2.4.
an obvious trendp = 0.051.0× alphagold
Although not statistically significant, there was an obvious trend with worse OS in women with EC expressing a high NCL quick score (≥6), than in women with low NCL quick score (<6) ( p = 0.05) ( Figure 2 C), with median survival in those with a low NCL quick score (<6) at 96 months when compared with the 30 months median survival in those with high NCL quick score (≥6).
nominally significantp < 0.051.0× alphagold
Although no individual lipid species remained significant after Benjamini–Hochberg false discovery rate correction, the lipid alterations showed systematic class-level trend which was significant for several lipid classes under Fisher’s combined probability test (as seen in Figure 1 ), and therefore, species-level results are still reported as nominally significant (unadjusted p < 0.05).
mildly significantp < 0.051.0× alphaqualifiedgold
When we divided the cases into two groups according to the timing of the initiation of PEG-IFN (N=32, each group), mildly significant differences ( p < 0.05) were found in some clinical characteristics between the patients in the first-half group and those in the second-half group ( Supplementary Table S3 ).