Barely Significant
← all phrases

did not reach statistical significance

50,128 sentences · 50,128 papers · 119,054 search hits before verification

In the literature

Although the lower prevalence of CR in the low-probability group compared with the intermediate- and high-probability groups did not reach statistical significance, the differences in CSFR between CDST response groups were statistically significant ( p = 0.04; Figure 2 ).
While the specific toothbrushing time categories did not reach statistical significance among children aged 6–8 years, the overall timing of brushing showed a significant relationship with lower caries prevalence ( p = 0.04), indicating a possible cumulative effect across all examined categories.
Subgroup analysis stratified by treatment regimen revealed that the same cutoff value predicted a trend toward longer survival in patients receiving combination therapy; however, the results did not reach statistical significance for OS (PFS: p = 0.04, OS: p = 0.06).
At stage 24, both the size of BB patches and the total number of BBs in deup1 morphants were mildly reduced relative to controls; however, this difference did not reach statistical significance ( P > 0.04; supplementary Fig. 5e, f ), suggesting that early BB formation and ciliogenesis are largely preserved during initial stages of epidermal development.
When depression severity was categorized as no depression, mild, moderate, and severe, a trend toward an increased incidence of stroke in the moderate and severe depression groups was observed; however, this trend did not reach statistical significance (p=0.04) ( Table 1 ).
While this difference, and the presence of t(14;16) and deletion (17p), did not reach statistical significance, a higher number of patients in the early progression cohort had t(4:14) (21% vs. 8.9 %; P =0.04).
Response to lenzilumab was observed in the first through third quartiles of baseline CRP with the greatest lenzilumab treatment effect observed in the first quartile (CRP <41 mg/L; HR: 8.20; 95% CI 1.74 to 38.69; p=0.0079) and a numeric difference that did not reach statistical significance in the second quartile and a significant treatment effect observed in the third quartile (CRP 79<137 mg/L; HR: 2.25; 95% CI 1.04 to 4.88; p=0.0407 ( table 3 )).
Interestingly, flatulence sensation paralleled intestinal gas evacuation and reverted to the level before administration, but the other sensations remained above pre-ingestion level; the differences between late ingestion and pre- ingestion levels were small and did not reach statistical significance, except for abdominal discomfort ( p = 0.041).
After 3 years' median follow-up, the PFS difference between atezolizumab and placebo did not reach statistical significance in the ITT (hazard ratio [HR], 0.83; 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.99; P = .041; median 13.5 v 11.3 months, respectively) or PD-L1–positive (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.16; P = .30; median 15.2 v 13.1 months, respectively) populations.
Although most gastrointestinal symptoms did not reach statistical significance, early satiety ( p = 0.041) and functional deterioration ( p = 0.039) were significantly associated with irinotecan administration, while nausea ( p = 0.089) and vomiting ( p = 0.087) showed trends toward significance.