Barely Significant
← all phrases

a statistical trend

960 sentences · 960 papers · 4,678 search hits before verification · confirmed specimen

Sighted at

p=0.09

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

In the literature

a statistical trendp = .0851.7× alphagold
All age effects remained significant with large effect sizes (η 2 p ≥.14), except for the modality-by-age interaction across the whole RPE network, which showed a statistical trend ( p = .085; see Supplementary Material B.7 for more details). 4 Discussion This study provides insights into the behavioural and neural processing underlying multisensory learning in children, focusing on audio-visual and tactile-visual associations.
a statistical trendp = 0.0851.7× alphagold
Multidimensional Scaling (MDS) analysis of the respiratory bacterial profiles of the elephants revealed a statistical trend ( p = 0.085, PERMANOVA) toward sample type divergence, based on the deviation of inter-sample diversity of the TW and ETT samples ( p = 0.029, p adj = 0.087).
a statistical trendp = 0.0861.7× alphagold
There was a statistical trend for dogs choosing the Both cup above chance (37.12 ± 9.87%; t-test, df = 21, t = 1.802, p = 0.086; Fig. 2 ), while the Subject-only cup was chosen above chance (43.94 ± 16.10%; t = 3.091, p = 0.006) and the Empty cup below chance (18.94 ± 11.26%; t=−5.993, p < 0.001; Fig. 2 ).
a statistical trendp = 0.0861.7× alphagold
Effect of vibration on in vivo active contractility and passive stiffness Plantarflexion torque about the ankle joint was ~18% lower in VML-0.6 g mice compared with VML-NoTx mice ( p = 0.030, Figure 1A ); however, when peak isometric-torque was normalized to gastrocnemius muscle-mass, a marker of muscle quality, there was only a statistical trend ( p = 0.086) for lower torque among VML-0.6 g mice ( Figure 1B ).
a statistical trendp = 0.0881.8× alphagold
At 2 years the baseline- and gender-adjusted Constant score was on average 3 points higher (CI -3 to 9) for group 3 (76 points; range 56–96) in comparison with group 2 (68 points; range 26–85) and 7 points (CI 1 to 13) compared to group 1 (68 points; range 40–85 points), an observation however that showed only a statistical trend but no significance ( p = 0.088) (Fig. 5 ).