Barely Significant

Excerpts

4,910 sentences · 1 filter applied

a statistical trendp = 0.061.2× alphagold
However, in the adjusted linear regression analysis ( Table 6 ), the variables still showing a significant relationship between money spent on DS in the last year were education ( p = 0.02), knowledge of health claims ( p = 0.001), and users of DS marketed for muscles/joints ( p = 0.01), as well as a statistical trend towards not having a partner ( p = 0.06).
marginally significantp ≤ 0.061.2× alphagold
With the addition of BMI, Step 2 was marginally significant, ΔR 2 = 0.04, F(2, 82) = 11.88, p ≤ 0.06, such that greater BMI was associated with greater SDRT, with BMI accounting for a marginal incremental amount of variance in incongruent RT variability beyond the associated descriptive variables, β = 0.19, t (82) = 1.93, p = 0.006.
close to significancep = 0.061.2× alpha
A meta-regression analysis included 18 weight loss studies, 5 of which reported no change, and 1 study even reported a reduction in 25(OH)D concentrations following weight loss [ 11 ]; overall, the results demonstrated an average increase in 25(OH)D concentrations of 6 nmol/L for an average weight loss of 10 kg that was close to significance ( p = 0.06).
a significant trendp = 0.061.2× alphagold
In this study, there was a significant trend to decrease the VE•VCO 2 −1 slope after BJ intake compared with the PL ( p = 0.06) during both routines although the VE•VCO 2 −1 slope only declined significantly with a rest between exercises coinciding with improvements in FS performance (first routine).
approached significancep = 0.0601.2× alpha
For the 4-category levels, the food-secure students (3.55 ± 1.1) were significantly lower in agreeing that their diet had changed than for the marginal (3.86 ± 1.0; p = 0.002) and very low food security students (4.04 ± 1.0; p < 0.001), while the low food-secure students approached significance (3.76 ± 1.1; p = 0.060).
approaching significancep = 0.061.2× alphagold
Control IntCB 1 +/+ mice displayed robust preferences for WD when compared to SD, an effect largely absent in IntCB 1 −/− mice by 3 h ( Figure 5 a, from 92.8 ± 2.8% total kcals from WD in IntCB 1 +/+ mice compared to 46.5 ± 12.5% in IntCB 1 −/− mice; p = 0.029), and approaching significance during the 3–6 h interval ( Figure 5 b, from 96.2 ± 3.8% total kcals from WD in IntCB 1 +/+ mice compared to 46.9 ± 16.5% in IntCB 1 −/− mice; p = 0.06).
borderline significantp = 0.061.2× alphagold
The interaction of the polymorphism rs3636536 within the VDR due to the functional relationship at 3 months after ending the therapy turned out to be borderline significant ( p = 0.06), while the correlation of pain intensity in rs4646536 with the genotype CC in rs11568820 ( VDR ) proved to be significant ( p = 0.02) [ 102 ].