Barely Significant
← all phrases

“almost reached significance”

322 sentences · 322 papers · 368 search hits before verification

In the literature

almost reached significancep = 0.0811.6× alpha
Of the seven included global scores (reading accuracy, reading speed, writing accuracy, phonemic awareness, memory and callosal transfer), a significant difference emerged for Global writing accuracy ( p = 0.029, partial eta square = 0.033), while Global reading accuracy and Global phonemic awareness almost reached significance ( p = 0.081, partial eta square = 0.023 and p = 0.071, partial eta square = 0.021, respectively).
almost reached significancep = 0.0831.7× alpha
However, when the structural language scales were examined separately in children with DLD, none of them reached significance, although the syntactic and pragmatic scales almost reached significance ( p = 0.083; p = 0.077). 3.4.3.
almost reached significancep = 0.0841.7× alpha
Multivariable analysis revealed that only tumor stage was significantly associated with pathological response to chemotherapy ( p = 0.032), although HER2 status and clinical response as a continuous variable almost reached significance ( p = 0.084 and p = 0.063, respectively).
almost reached significancep = .0881.8× alpha
However, neither the health and lifestyle factors (Step 3) nor network size (Step 4) was associated with R 2 increments, although baseline network size almost reached significance for change in explained variance, R 2 change = .002, F change (1, 594) = 2.93, p = .088 [ β = .046, t (594) = 1.71, p = .088].
However, the difference in NPO at 3-month follow-up between the 2 groups almost reached significance (Cuidándome: mean 5.45, SD 3.15 vs comparison: mean 7.66, SD 4.82; P =.09), and we estimated small (T1: d =0.10) and medium (T2: d =0.54 and T3: d =0.38) effect sizes ( Table 4 ).
almost reached significancep = 0.4489.0× alpha
Results showed that the interaction between Focal Goal Magnitude × Alternative Goal Magnitude (β = −0.14, p = 0.081) as well as the interaction between Alternative Goal Magnitude × Painfulness (β = 0.15, p = 0.057) almost reached significance, whereas the interaction between Focal Goal Magnitude × Painfulness did not (β = 0.06, p = 0.448).