Barely Significant
← all phrases

did not reach statistical significance

58,633 sentences · 58,633 papers · 119,054 search hits before verification

In the literature

There was a trend towards the transition period being more stressful for patients who attend at least two other hospital specialists, and for those without any affected family members, but this did not reach statistical significance (fisher exact value 0.0613 in both cases, significant at p <0.05).
reported that although the ingestion of 20 g of creatine during 5 days was effective for increasing intramuscular creatine content, the benefits observed on PPO and fatigue resistance compared to a placebo during a repeated sprint protocol did not reach statistical significance ( p =0.05 and p = 0.08, respectively) [ 8 ].
We observed that although carriers of AVI/AVI G* (the non-tasters on both individual genes) relative to tasters showed an increase in breast cancer risk, the observed OR did not reach statistical significance at p≤0.05 level (OR = 1.61, 95% CI 0.94–2.77; p = 0.083).
Those presenting for pain who screened positive for SI were more likely to characterize their pain as persistent or chronic (81.6%), which trended toward but did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.05).
EPOS/POSNA Abstract Book
J Child Orthop · 2024 · PMC11062292
3F ), and in IGD participants ( r = 0.46, p = 0.065) (although did not reach statistical significance) in central ROIs; In lateral ROIs, significant correlation was observed between the NM values and addiction severity in IGD ( r = 0.50, p < 0.05) ( Fig. 3G ), and in TUD participants ( r = 0.42, p = 0.139).
T/F viruses with incompletely closed Envs were also more sensitive to sCD4, although this difference did not reach statistical significance ( P = 0.05; Supplementary Fig. 3d ); and we observed a significant correlation between cold and sCD4 sensitivity ( P = 0.0005; Fig. 1f ).
interaction term between study year and education; other tested combinations did not reach statistical significance at p < 0.05) Model 1, the effects were slightly attenuated, but retained their significance with substantial variance in SSB consumption by study year, sex, age, and education.
Even though the remaining diagnostic class base-learners, including "Gastritis/Reflux Disease", did not reach statistical significance (p<0.05), employing a stack that solely resorts to significant base-learners led to a reduction in generalization capacity: AUC 0.98 (95% CI 0.97–0.99), sensitivity 0.98 (95% CI 0.95–1), PPV 0.92 (95% CI 0.91–0.92), NPV 0.97 (95% CI 0.94–0.99) in the discovery set; AUC 0.93 (95% CI 0.87–0.99), sensitivity 0.82 (95% CI 0.64–0.95), PPV 0.53 (95% CI 0.47–0.57), NPV 0.97 (95% CI 0.95–0.99) in the validation set.