Sentence examples for almost significant differences from inspiring English sources

Almost significant differences between the specialties in both major categories were observed (see Table 3).

Significant or almost significant differences in aromatase mRNA levels according to Ex 1 groups were observed in EldCa (P = 0.0511), EldNorm (P = 0.0444), and ContNorm (P = 0.0209), whereas no significant difference was obtained in ContCa (P = 0.4871, one-factor ANOVA) (Table 1).

An ANOVA was performed on the quality scores to detect the significant variations in ratings: a difference between the extreme levels of audio quality (La1 and La7) was found for the video level Lv3 and an almost significant difference for Lv7, with a maximal difference of 0.35 MOS.

Moreover, MANOVA revealed an almost significant difference in the overall level of activity between pre- and post-injection (main effect of Time: Wilks' lambda = 0.3944, df = 1,15, p = 0.0909).

One exception to this was the small (ca. 5%) but almost significant difference (P = 0.052) in fertility, i.e. more eggs hatched in the DKc5143 pollen treatment compared to the Dracma treatment.

There was an almost significant difference between double and stop trials, t15 = 1.52, P = 0.07.

We found a significant effect of the treatments on the compounds forming the first principal component (PC1) of uropygial gland secretions (Table  3b; Figure  3a), with an almost significant difference between TSB and control treatments (0.32 ± 0.15; F1,17 = 4.33; p = 0.053), but not between Nisin and control (0.04 ± 0.13; F1,19 = 0.08; p = 0.77).

Multiple regression of age at diagnosis, after taking age into account, did find an almost significant difference between the PCD-SI and PCD-SS groups (t56 = 1.919, p =.060), although the effect was principally due to the outlier, who was aged 63, but diagnosed at the age of five.

The most significant difference was that almost 30% of our subjects had no inspiratory fall in Pra, whereas only three patients or 14% had no inspiratory fall in Pra in Heenen and colleagues' study.

In two cohorts, there were almost no significant differences among tumor or patient characteristics between the different autoantibody positivities (Supplementary Tables S2 and S3).

If a trait was controlled by an extreme number of minor genes, almost no significant differences were detected between the predictive ability of various methods, but RR-BLUP slightly outperformed the others in both simulated scenarios and real data analysis, thus demonstrating its robustness and indicating that it was quite effective in this case.