Barely Significant
← all phrases

approaching significance

1,072 sentences · 1,072 papers · 3,275 search hits before verification · confirmed specimen

Sighted at

p=0.09

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

In the literature

approaching significancep < 0.061.2× alphagold
Forgiveness is Immunoprotective When Exploitation Risk is Salient Although the moderating effect of exploitation risk was approaching significance ( p < 0.06), due to the small sample size and the subsequent constraints on statistical power to detect differences, the interaction was probed further to examine the levels of exploitation risk at which forgiveness was associated with EBV antibodies.
approaching significancep = 0.061.2× alphagold
The borderline protective signal observed with RAAS inhibitor use, approaching significance in subgroup analysis ( p = 0.06 for ΔFMD at 24 h) and showing consistent positive Spearman correlations at 24 h (ρ = +0.20) and one month (ρ = +0.30), is biologically plausible given the vasoprotective properties of this drug class through reduction in angiotensin II-mediated oxidative stress, preservation of bradykinin signaling, and upregulation of eNOS activity [ 34 ].
approaching significanceP = 0.0611.2× alphagold
Multivariate analysis revealed that heart disease (HR 1.94, 95% CI 1.070–6.793, P = 0.035), T-stage (HR 1.94, 95% CI 1.340–2.840, P < 0.001), and N-stage (HR 1.73, 95% CI 1.102–2.739, P = 0.017) were independent prognostic factors for DFS, with age approaching significance ( P = 0.061).
approaching significancep = 0.0631.3× alphagold
As evidenced by the post-experience increases in students’ “Approach to Challenges”, the subscale was large enough to be statistically significant [ t (43) = −2.60, p = 0.006], while students’ mean score increase for the “Self-Efficacy” subscale was approaching significance [ t (43) = −1.56, p = 0.063].
approaching significancep = 0.0631.3× alphagold
Among the covariates, OCT—approaching significance ( p = 0.063)—had a 63% reduction in hazard (HR = 0.370, p = 0.063), indicating a strong protective effect but without reaching significance; age—significant ( p = 0.035)—with Exp (B) = 1.030, suggesting each year in age increases hazard by 3%; female sex—significant with p = 0.042—suggests a protective effect compared to male counterparts; and ‘true’ bifurcation type—significant with p = 0.027—was associated with a significant increase in mortality when compared to simple bifurcations or ostial lesions (HR = 1.787) 4.4.