Barely Significant
← all phrases

“did not reach statistical significance”

111,028 sentences · 111,028 papers · 130,054 search hits before verification

In the literature

The difference between the subgroups using the WOMAC (Table 3 ) global and clinical variables, including pain, stiffness, and function, did not reach statistical significance either, although a possible trend toward a worse baseline condition for the fast group was shown.
Tumour grade showed a trend towards reduced survival with increasing dedifferentiation, with colorectal cancer related deaths occurring in 34.5% (10/29), 48.4% (171/353) and 56.3% (40/71) of patients with well, moderately and poorly differentiated tumours respectively, although this did not reach statistical significance in our cohort of patients.
did not reach statistical significancep = 0.132.6× alphaplainly factual
The intensity of GLuc luminescence in rat blood tends to be higher in the IPP (+) group [IPP (−) vs IPP (+) (AU); 2600 ± 224 vs 2824 ± 241, p = 0.13, Cohen’s d = 0.96]: Although the difference did not reach statistical significance ( p = 0.13), the large effect size in the animal experience (Cohen’s d = 0.96) suggests a notable trend (Fig. 7j ).
The results of the meta-analysis were consistent with these findings, with an overall trend toward greater SAF in smokers than in non-smokers for similar age groups, but the difference did not reach statistical significance ( Supplementary Table S7 , Figure S9 ).
Results of the meta-analysis In the randomized clinical trials, the FVC mean difference at 12 months between patients treated with CYC and patients treated with placebo or another immunosuppressant showed a positive trend in favor of the CYC group (mean difference = 4.15%), but did not reach statistical significance (95% confidence interval (CI) = -0.51 to 8.80; Figure 2a ).
did not reach statistical significanceP = 0.0771.5× alphaplainly factual
showed beneficial effects of higher PEEP on morbidity and mortality.[ 43 ] Two other trials with 549 and 767 enrolled patients reported no improvement in survival due to mean PEEP levels of 13±3.5 or 15.8±2.9 cm H 2 O, respectively, in ALI or ARDS.[ 40 49 ] An actual meta-analysis including data from 2484 patients showed a trend toward reduced mortality with higher PEEP even though the difference did not reach statistical significance (odds ratio 0.90 CI 0.72–1.02; P = 0.077).
Acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome.
J Emerg Trauma Shock · 2010 · PMC2823143