Barely Significant
← all phrases

a significant trend

9,776 sentences · 9,776 papers · 46,430 search hits before verification · confirmed specimen

Sighted at

p=0.09

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

In the literature

a significant trendp = 0.0561.1× alphagold
early), a significant trend suggested a decrease of T2 in adolescence transition (mid, 68.2 ms vs. late, 63.7 ms, p = 0.056); therefore, a reduced water molecule tumbling due to increased interactions with macromolecules was likely observed.
a significant trendp = 0.0561.1× alphagold
The stratified analysis, performed to determine the possible interaction of agr functionality on these results revealed a significant trend toward higher biofilm formation in MRSA than MSSA in agr functional strains ( p = 0.056), but not in agr dysfunctional strains ( p = 0.800) indicating that agr functionality is a confounding factor for these results.
a significant trendp = 0.0561.1× alphagold
As per the multivariate Cox regression, BVS undersizing (Hazard ratio [HR] 2.65, 95% CI: 1.27–5.53, p = 0.009) and number of implanted scaffolds (HR 1.33, 95% CI: 1.04–1.70, p = 0.024) were independent predictors of MACE, with a significant trend also emerging for diabetes mellitus (HR 1.93, 95% CI: 0.98–3.79, p = 0.056). 14 The high MACE rates could also be attributed to lack of consistent use of Absorb optimal implantation techniques across various centers participating in the trial. 11 Furthermore, there was a clustering of definite/prob
a significant trendP =0.0571.1× alphagold
Results When the data were analyzed as a whole, after 4–5 weeks of similar low-GI diet intervention, we found that the decrease of triglycerides (TG) in the homozygous Ala54 carriers was more significant than that in the Thr54 allele carriers ([−0.58±1.24] vs [−0.14±1.08], P =0.015) with the adjustment for potential confounding factors; furthermore, compared with the Thr54 carriers, there was a significant trend in the decrease of total cholesterol (TC) in the homozygous Ala54 carriers ( P =0.057).
a significant trendp = 0.0581.2× alphagold
Due to much larger variability of the mapped pain areas compared to NRS pain rating, ANOVA of the pain distributions revealed only a significant trend effect for “tissue” (F = 4.2, p = 0.058), but a significant main effect of “volume of injection” (F = 5.3, p < 0.01), while there was no interaction at all between both (F = 0.1, p = 0.926; two way RM-ANOVA, Figure 5 A).