Barely Significant

Excerpts

514,629 sentences

highly significantP=0.0060.1× alphaqualifiedgold
Second, stratifying the cohort by the clinical eGFR cut-off of 60 mL/min/1.73 m 2 revealed a clear moderating effect: the GMV reduction in the CI group was not significant in patients with eGFR ≥60 mL/min/1.73 m 2 (P=0.148) but was highly significant in those with eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m 2 (P=0.006; Table S3 ).
a decreasing trendp = 0.0060.1× alphagold
Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were well balanced between the SCDM-DHM group and the control group ( p > 0.05), with no statistically significant differences observed in terms of maternal age, birth weight, gestational age, number of males, delivery mode, SGA status, or length of hospital stay; a decreasing trend in the number of single births was observed in the SCDM-DHM group ( p = 0.006).
a significant trendP = 0.0060.1× alphagold
As shown in Table 1 , the characteristics that showed a significant trend across SOFA tertiles were mean blood pressure values ( P = 0.006), need of vasopressors for hemodynamic support ( P < 0.001), need for MV ( P < 0.001), the time from symptom onset to ICU admission ( P = 0.014), and treatment with tocilizumab ( P = 0.013).
a significant trendP = 0.0060.1× alphagold
Univariate analyses for CIMT progression as an ordinal (tertile) variable yielded a significant trend for increasing CIMT progression tertile with greater concentrations of fasting glucose ( P = 0.006) and a significant trend for less CIMT progression higher baseline CIMT ( P < 0.001).
Although group differences in total lung iNOS+ expression (including TBLs) did not reach statistical significance (Figure 3 B), in nonimmunized goats this marker correlated strongly with both gross ( r > 0.81, p = 0.006) and microscopic lesion scores ( r > 0.77, p = 0.010).
highly significantP < 0.0060.1× alphaqualifiedgold
Age, best-corrected visual acuity, and intraocular pressure did not differ significantly between RP patients and healthy controls ( P > 0.05), whereas there was a highly significant difference with regard to visual field parameters, MD ( P < 0.006) and PSD ( P < 0.001) and ERG; indeed, RP had peripheral visual field defects and decreased b-wave and a-wave amplitude compared to controls ( P < 0.002 and P < 0.019, resp.).
markedly significantp = 0.0060.1× alphaqualified
1 – 3 ), the EEFBs removed almost 53.1% ± 1.13% of the TN with a concentration of up to 6.56 ± 0.20 mg L −1 , and the net removal rate of EEFBs and EFBs were 40.9% ± 1.13% and 14.5% ± 1.19%, which represent a markedly significant difference in the TN removal ( p = 0.006).