Barely Significant
← all phrases

“highly significant”

132,143 sentences · 132,143 papers · 160,126 search hits before verification · confirmed specimen

Sighted at

p=0.09

Listed by Hankins (2013)

In the literature

highly significantp < 0.00050.0× alphaqualifiedgold
When we included latitude as a predictor in the model it explained additional variance to the temperature effect and both temperature, temperature 2 and latitude were highly significant independent predictors (e.g. for the January temperature effect the explained variance by temperature and temperature 2 was 16.8% (F 2,2648 = 268.0, p < 0.0005) and when latitude was included the explained variation increased to 20.1% (F 3,2647 = 221.98, p < 0.0005).
highly significantP = 0.00050.0× alphaqualifiedgold
A highly significant reduction in interleukins-6 (IL-6) (standardised mean difference (SMD) = 1.32 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.58, 2.06), Z = 3.48, P = 0.0005), a significant reduction in tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) (SMD = 1.29 (95% CI: 0.19, 2.39), Z = 2.30, P = 0.02) but no change in overall C-reactive protein (CRP) (SMD = 0.40 (95% CI: -0.26, 1.07), Z = 1.19, P = 0.23) levels were observed by using the random-effects model.
highly significantp = 0.00050.0× alphaqualifiedgold
When including age as continuous variable, the terms for age x month interactions were highly significant ( p = 0.0005, df = 4), suggesting an important trend to lower rates of suicide attempts following the start of AD treatment at higher ages, but not, or less so, at younger ages.
highly significantp < 0.00050.0× alphaqualifiedgold
Nevertheless, in an independent series of experiments, registering only the total numbers of eggs produced by each female after their death, we observed a highly significant and consistent decrease ( p < 0.0005; unpaired T-test) in the number of eggs laid by females injected with ds RpCht7 (average 39) when compared to females injected with ds GFP (average 18).
highly significantp = 0.00050.0× alphaqualifiedgold
In a multivariable analysis of EFS including pre-transplant IDDA v2.1 ≤ 14 / ≥15 and HCT-CI ≤ 2 / ≥3 and the interaction between these prognostic factors, as well as age at transplant and date of transplant, neither IDDA v2.1 ( p = 0.059, HR = 4.6) nor HCT-CI ( p = 0.057, HR = 7.1) were independently significant, but the interaction between these two factors combined (HCT-CI ≥ 3 and IDDA v2.1 ≥ 15) was highly significant ( p = 0.0005, HR = 18.0), Fig. 3 H.