Barely Significant

Excerpts

27,100 sentences · 1 filter applied

nearly significantp = 0.061.2× alphagold
Notably, the comparison in AZGP1 in the unbound fraction was nearly significant (p = 0.06) and demonstrated a similar trend of increased levels in PCa patients, suggesting that AZGP1 may be over-expressed at the protein level and not necessarily displaying differential glycosylation.
borderline significantp = 0.061.2× alphagold
Visceral adipose tissue phenotype and estimated insulin sensitivity In VAT, increased HIF-1α and MCP-1 expression was associated with decreased estimated IS even after correcting for VAT mass (β = − 0.37, p = 0.01 and β = − 0.25, p = 0.03), whereas the associations between increased adipocyte size and PcF and estimated IS were only borderline significant after adjusting for VAT mass (β = − 0.14, p = 0.06 and β = − 0.36, p = 0.06) (Table 3 ).
near significancep = 0.061.2× alphagold
Analysis of these data confirms that the tumor burden in the trastuzumab only group was significantly greater (p = 0.04) than that of the trastuzumab + FUS + MBs group (mean tumor volume = 25 ± 17 mm 3 vs 8 ± 5 mm 3 ), and near significance (p = 0.06) was observed between the trastuzumab + FUS + MBs group and the control group (24 ± 7 mm 3 ).
marginally significantp = 0.061.2× alphagold
Three-group comparisons showed, however, a marginally significant effect of group on TL in naïve cytotoxic T cells ( F [2,34] = 3.07, p = 0.06) and a significant effect on TL in memory cytotoxic T cells ( F [2,13.7] = 5.68, p = 0.02), with a stepwise decrease in TL from non-depressed control subjects over MDD patients without CSA to MDD patients with CSA, who presented the shortest TL.
a trend toward significancep = 0.061.2× alpha
The differences between C-MHE and C-NMHE patients in CVLT total learning remain significant; there is a trend toward significance (p = 0.06) on delayed recall when comparing C-MHE and C-NMHE patients, probably due to the lower number of patients in this sample, reaching significance when more number of patients are included, as shown in Table 1 .
marginally significantP = 0.061.2× alphagold
In the unfiltered condition, typically developing children showed shorter reaction times in global decision than in local decision [marginally significant, F(1,56) = 3.59, P = 0.06], while there was no significant difference between global and local decision for the other two groups (M-D normal DD: [F(1,56) = 0.71, P = 0.40]; M-D impaired DD: [F(1,56) = 0.87, P = 0.36]).