Barely Significant
← all phrases

“a numerical trend”

1,013 sentences · 1,013 papers · 1,817 search hits before verification · confirmed specimen

Sighted at

p=0.09

Listed by Hankins (2013) · Otte et al. (2022)

In the literature

These observations are consistent with those from another network meta-analysis comparing the relative efficacy of peginterferon beta-1a versus other injectable first-line DMTs, including GA, which showed a numerical trend favoring peginterferon beta-1a 125 mcg Q2W versus GA 20 mg/ml QD for 12- and 24-week CDW but not for ARR. 25 Two recent network meta-analyses also demonstrated no difference in efficacy between peginterferon beta-1a and either regimen of GA on ARR, 26 , 27 though a positive impact on risk of diseas
For the subset of patients where the method's assessment is in disagreement with the final IRC response, we observe a numerical trend where the OS survival rates of patients assessed as CMR by the model and non-CMR by the final IRC response are numerically better than the survival rates of non-CMR patients by the model and CMR by the final IRC response (Data Supplement, Fig S12).
However, a numerical trend for improvement was seen in the low-dose group compared to placebo. 3.4 Additional efficacy end points No statistically significant treatment effects were detected between active treatment and placebo for COWAT, CFT, CSDD, CFQ ( Supplementary Table 1 ), or the CGI-C ( Supplementary Table 2 ). 3.5 Pharmacokinetics ORM-12741 did not accumulate during the 12 weeks of treatment.
Although there was a numerical trend towards larger singleton presence costs (an index of attention capture by the color singleton distractor) in the first halves of the blocks (10 ms) than the second halves of the blocks (−6 ms), F (1, 69) = 3.25, p = .08, η p 2 = .05 (see Fig. 2 B), this effect was only a small fraction of the effect reported in Vatterott and Vecera’s ( 2012 ) Experiment 1 (approximately 77 ms vs. −29 ms for the first and second halves, respectively, as estimated from their Fig. 2 ).
Learned distractor rejection: Robust but surprisingly rapid.
Atten Percept Psychophys · 2025 · PMC12058820
However, although we found that children’s comprehension in the high-relevant animation condition was significantly better than that in the low-relevant animation condition, there was no significant facilitating effect of the animation of high-relevant elements compared with the static condition (only existed a numerical trend on the test score: high-relevant is 3.32 and static is 3.03).
The primary and key secondary endpoints were not achieved in the overall study population or in the subpopulations evaluated in these analyses; despite a numerical trend suggesting that steroid tapering was possible to a greater extent in the ustekinumab group compared with the placebo group, there was insufficient evidence to support continuation of development of ustekinumab in patients with SLE.
While the trustworthy source was better remembered than the unspecified source for both statements with high a priori credibility, Δ G 2 (1) = 21.78, p < .01, as well as statements with low a priori credibility, Δ G 2 (1) = 14.41, p < .01, there was only a numerical trend for untrustworthy sources to be better remembered than the unspecified source, but this trend was neither significant for statements with high a priori credibility, Δ G 2 (1) = 0.79, p = .38, nor for statements with low a priori credibility, Δ G 2 (1) = 2.17, p = .14.
In both insulin-naïve and insulin-experienced participants, the incidence of hypoglycaemia and gastrointestinal-related AEs during iGlarLixi treatment showed no significant difference between the achieved versus the not-achieved group, although a numerical trend towards an increased incidence of both AEs was observed in participants who achieved their age-defined glycaemic target.
MAIC results were similar, also suggesting comparable rates of CR (OR 1.12; 95% CI 0.61–2.08) and CR + CRh (OR 0.83; 95% CI 0.46–1.50) between treatments; the adjusted point estimate indicated a numerical trend in favor of olutasidenib for CR and ivosidenib for CR + CRh but was not statistically significant.