However, this difference was not quite statistically significant (p = 0.08).
← all phrases
“not quite statistically significant”
In the literature
In subsequent surveys the mean BMI of those still alive rises by 0.49 kg/m 2 per 100 days by the second survey and 0.46 kg/m 2 by the time of the third survey, not quite statistically significant (Anova – F = 2.58, df = 2, p = 0.08).
not quite statistically significantp-value = 0.08
There was a further small increase in the brc1Δ csn1Δ strain (44.2%) although the difference with csn1Δ was not quite statistically significant (p-value = 0.08) ( Figure 3A ).
However, HPLC-based quantification of nanoparticle retention confirms the increased retention of 1 μm nanoparticles is not quite statistically significant (p = 0.08), and 2 μm nanoparticles are not significantly different after I/R injury (p = 0.24).
not quite statistically significantP = 0.081
epidermidis in the oral rinse samples of patients with periodontal disease in comparison to orally healthy participants was not quite statistically significant ( P = 0.081).
not quite statistically significantp = 0.0815
Although the CyPA expression in the placenta of neonates with an APGAR score of <7 at 1 min was 100% (9/9) compared to only 69.2% (18/26) in APGAR >7, it was not quite statistically significant ( p = 0.0815). 3.5.
not quite statistically significantP = 0.082
This analysis revealed that baseline pro-NT-BNP levels negatively correlated with LVEF changes but this was not quite statistically significant (r = −0.469, P = 0.082).
not quite statistically significantp = 0.083
Indeed, if we pool the data from the four isofemale lines, the parasites that had evolved in the two generalist regimes ( mixture and alternating ) tended to have higher infectivity on average (63.5% ± 2.6% standard error) than the specialist parasites (58.5% ± 1.9% s.e.), although this difference was not quite statistically significant (logistic analysis: χ 2 = 3.00, df = 1, p = 0.083).
not quite statistically significantP -value = 0.083
The difference in chain length is considered to be statistically significant ( P -value = 0.0048), while the difference in D-Ala modifications is not quite statistically significant ( P -value = 0.083).
not quite statistically significantp = 0.083
Similar to the DS results, the CAF‐RCF samples showed only a slight increase in the hydroxyl band, though it was not quite statistically significant ( p = 0.083).
not quite statistically significantp = 0.084
That decrease was not quite statistically significant (p = 0.084).
not quite statistically significantp = 0.0841
Older patients with high % compliance had a lower mean BOP (14.2% ± 9.5; n = 64) than younger patients with high % compliance (18.0% ± 11.7, n = 37), which was not quite statistically significant (p = 0.0841) ( Table 3 ).
not quite statistically significantP = 0.087
Although a low preoperative albumin level was associated with a high re-admission rate, it was not quite statistically significant ( P = 0.087).
VHI-10 worsened in the “no-IONM” group compared with both i-IONM ( p < 0.09, not quite statistically significant) and c-IONM ( p < 0.04).
However, the risk of having CKS increased when other cancers were present (OR 4.2), although this association was not quite statistically significant (P = 0.09).
23 , 24 Notably, our data do not entirely fit this latter hypothesis as, although not quite statistically significant, there was more aortic regurgitation after BAV ( P =0.09), and patients demonstrated greater residual echocardiographic peak Doppler gradients ( P =0.06).
The correlation between age and chest radiography was not quite statistically significant (r = 0.2, p = 0.09).
not quite statistically significantp = 0.0915
This trend was also observed at 10 μmol/L, even if it was not quite statistically significant ( p = 0.0915).
not quite statistically significantp = 0.092
Although the main effect was not quite statistically significant [ H (4) = 8.000, p = 0.092], the pairwise comparisons revealed a statistically significant difference between the individuals with resilient and overcontrolled profiles ( p = 0.032), and those with resilient and undercontrolled profiles ( p = 0.019).
not quite statistically significantp = 0.092
While there is still a gain in mean QALYs per person at 12 months compared to at 3 months, this difference was not quite statistically significant (mean difference = 0.011; 95% CI 0.006, −0.002; p = 0.092).
not quite statistically significantP = 0.093
DLQI score also showed some degree of improvement from baseline to week 24, however, this difference was not quite statistically significant (median: 5 vs. 3, P = 0.093).
not quite statistically significantP = 0.095
While sensitivity analyses using ordinal logistic regression showed TD status to be a significant predictor of PCS, PF, ISMI and Q-LES-Q, MCS was not quite statistically significant ( P = 0.095) using this lower-powered test.
45 Although not quite statistically significant, we did observe an increased risk of falls in those with a higher Hester Davis Scale, with an OR (per each doubling) of 1.45 ( P =.097), worth exploring further in larger studies.
Patients with central stenosis were also at a greater risk for dural tear compared with those without central stenosis; however, this was not quite statistically significant (OR = 3.28, P = .097).
not quite statistically significantp = 0.099
While the induced group shows a higher mean CDW (8.69 g/L) than the uninduced group (7.67 g/L), the difference is not quite statistically significant ( p = 0.099).