Barely Significant

Excerpts

27,100 sentences · 1 filter applied

marginally significantp = 0.0571.1× alphagold
Further post-hoc analysis on the interpersonal trust metric showed no significant group differences for males ( p = 0.119) but a marginally significant difference for females ( p = 0.057), with female athletes in the cooperative group exhibiting stronger interpersonal trust than those in the competitive group.
a strong trendp = 0.0571.1× alphagold
Since seven of our OS participants left our study before taking this (grapheme-personification) synaesthesia test, we repeated our analysis with the conservative assumption that all were non-synaesthetes and this still resulted in a strong trend for a higher prevalence of confirmed grapheme-personification synaesthesia for gender associations in the OS group compared to controls, χ 2 (1) = 3.618, p = 0.057, 95% CI [−0.004, 0.30].
almost significantp-value = 0.05731.1× alphagold
We observed an almost significant (p-value = 0.0573) positive correlation (Spearman's rank correlation coefficient r = 0.3635) between HDI and the frequency of A subtype and a significant (p-value = 0.0122) negative correlation (Spearman's rank correlation coefficient r = − 0.4669) between HDI and the frequency of D subtype (Fig. 1 S of supplementary material).
a strong trendp = 0.05781.2× alphagold
Survival analysis confirms the importance of more than 5 CTCs in the sample Kaplan–Meier survival analysis and landmark analysis for follow-up collections indicated that although CTCs presence/absence in the first collection was not significant for PFS and OS, detection of ≥ 5 CTCs was identified to be significant for OS (log-rank test p < 0.05) and a strong trend for PFS was also observed (log-rank test p = 0.0578) (Fig. 2 A,B).
just short of significancep = 0.05781.2× alphagold
In addition, there was a trend towards a higher percentage of Arc -positive neurons expressing Arc mRNA in the nucleus and cytoplasm in the CA3 region of the hippocampus following exposure twice to the same environment, as opposed to exposure to two different environments in sham-irradiated mice but that difference was just short of significance ( t = 1.796, p = 0.0578, Fig. 4D ).