“a statistical trend”

Statistical significance was defined as P < 0.05, while a statistical trend was defined as 0.05 ≤ P < 0.10.

In fact, as additional support for this formulation, we found a statistical trend in our univariate analysis of small-worldness ( p < 0.10), but not of transitivity or characteristic path length .

A statistical trend for a difference was defined as an unadjusted Wilcoxon rank sum test or Welch’s t -test result of p < 0.1 and a Hedge’s g effect size | g |≥ 0.8.

In the case of olive plantlets treated by foliar spray, a statistical trend towards a reduction in MDA levels compared to control plants was observed ( p < 0.1).

Similarly, significance was always stated at p < 0.05 (while p < 0.1 was considered as a statistical trend). 3.

Independent variables that achieved a statistical significance (P < 0.05) or a statistical trend ( P < 0.1 but ≥ 0.05) in univariate analysis were used in multivariate analysis.

Level of significance was set at p < 0.05 (two-tailed), a statistical trend was defined at p < 0.1 (two-tailed).

A statistical trend was considered when 0.05 < P ≤ 0.10.

We also found a statistical trend (p<0.10) suggesting that having less than high school education was independently associated with failure to return for the seven-day clinic visit.

Parameters showing a statistical trend (defined as p < 0.1) in the univariable analysis were entered in multivariable GEE models; stepwise backward variable selection was used to derive a parsimonious model.

When evaluating the reduction in systolic BP within the group consuming nattokinase, the decrease from 144±1.5 mmHg to 140±2.1 mmHg reached a statistical trend ( P <0.1).

On a statistical trend level, carriers of ɛ 4 showed reduced BFCS volumes (non-carrier of ɛ 4 584.1±86.2, carrier of ɛ 4 531.5±43.2; p = 0.10) and lower MoCA scores (non-carrier of ɛ 4 23.8±1.6, carrier of ɛ 4 21.4±3.2; p = 0.06).

A statistical trend was defined as a P value < 0.1 but >0.05/n.

In the latter, a statistical trend for downregulation was observed at day 10 pp (FC = −1.21, 0.05 < p < 0.1), ( Figure 5(c) and 6(c) , Table 5 ).

When a statistical trend ( P < 0.1) was evident with at least one of the between-group differences with glimepiride, within-group changes from baseline to final measures were compared with dependent Student t tests or the Wilcoxon matched-pairs test as appropriate.

This finding showed a statistical trend (p < 0.1) in the two highest doses.

A statistical trend was considered for P < 0.10.

All parameters showing a statistical trend ( p < 0.1) in univariate analysis were included in a multivariate regression model to identify parameters that were independently associated with unfavorable outcomes at 3 months.

The relationship between decline in eye fixation and outcome becomes a statistical trend by 2–9 months ( P = 0.100), and is statistically significant thereafter.

Statistical significance was assessed at the 95 % confidence level (α=0.05) using Snedecor's F as the contrast statistic, while differences were considered a statistical trend when 0.05 < P < 0.10.

0.05 ≤ p ≤ 0.10 was considered a statistical trend, and p > 0.10 indicated no significant difference. 3 Results 3.1 Effects of kaempferol on the liver of late-laying hens As shown in Figure 2 , the liver tissue of the CON group exhibited obvious lipid vacuolization, with large and numerous vacuoles distributed in the hepatic lobules, indicating severe hepatic lipid deposition.

Statistical significance (p<0.05) is denoted by an asterisk (*), while a statistical trend (0.05<p<0.1) is denoted by a hash symbol (#).

The ACT group showed a statistical trend toward a lower frequency of embolic events at the time of admission and during the entire disease period ( P < 0.1).

The MAR results were not statistically significant, while the VIR index showed a statistical trend for the relation between condition and bacteria ( p = 0.10), since the isolates from the positive control and from the RMS supplemented with 2.5% biochar had a significantly lower VIR index than those from the RMS supplemented with 5% and 10% biochar.

Furthermore, the univariate regression analysis provided a statistical trend, p < 0.10, for the association with the comfortable walking speed score as well as the maximum walking speed max ( Table 3 ). 4.