Excerpts

Despite approaching significance in boys at the p < 0.05 level, the effect was small relative to the other effects in boys (e.g., comparison to beta coefficients for thin-ideal internalisation and the social media use x muscular-ideal internalisation interaction).

In subgroup analyses ( Figure 5 ), we found marginally significant results favoring boys vs. girls in children aged 3 (SMD = 0.27 (95% CI 0.00, 0.54), p = 0.05) and significant results favoring boys vs. girls aged 4, 5 and 6 years (SMD = 0.58 (95% CI 0.38, 0.77), p < 0.00001; SMD = 0.59 (95% CI 0.31, 0.88), p < 0.00001; SMD = 0.81 (95% CI 0.61, 1.01), p < 0.00001), which increased with age. 3.6.

As a result, the proliferation rate in the treatment group (1.0 μM NaAsO 2 ) was significantly higher at passages 21, 28, and 35 than that in the passage-matched control group (0.0 μM NaAsO 2 ) and showed a trend of increasing passage by passage ( p < 0.05) ( Figure 1 a).

Additionally, a Kruskal–Wallis test considering the different levels confirmed these differences as highly significant ( p < 0.05).

36.1/month, p = 0.004), and there was a borderline significant increase in presentations with SSI (7.8/month vs. 11.3/month, p = 0.05).

However, it must be noted that in our meta-analysis the latter study was borderline significant ( p = 0.05).

Highly significant statistical correlations (R > 0.52, p < 0.05) were observed among all elements, except for As-Cr and As-Cu in soil samples ( Figure 2 ).

BDI subscale C showed a trend toward a shorter decrease in the WNS 2.4 g group than that in the placebo group ( p < 0.05) ( Figure 4 ).

In this same model, census tracts composed of a high percentage (>50%) of lower-middle class residents ($22,500–$55,000 household income) had more TRI facilities than more affluent tracts (borderline significance p = 0.05).

were higher (at the limit of significance level, p > 0.05) than at 10:00 a.m., while in the CG, they remained at a similar level. 3.3.

In addition, we carried out the Wilcoxon signed-rank test to investigate the absolute stability of scores, and found that, despite the tests were statistically or marginally significant, the effect sizes suggested that these differences were negligible (BOA/SUB: Z(98) = −1.95, p = 0.05, r = −0.14; SUP: Z(98) = −2.12, p = 0.034, r = −0.15; BOA: Z(98) = −3.12, p = 0.002, r = −0.22). 4.

Only mouth width showed a moderately significant positive correlation with the amount of jackscrew activation ( p < 0.05). 4.2.

No differences were found in the students’ opinions as a function of age, and only marginally significant differences in Factor III according to sex and gender: t(300) = −1.964; p = 0.05.

Thus, we obtained moderately significant effect sizes in reduced sense of accomplishment ( d = −0.74, SE = 0.31, p < 0.05).

It was close to significance in the case of grocery workers ( F = 3.20 and p = 0.05), who showed lower psychological impacts in May–June ( M = 36.88 and SD = 19.60) than in March ( M = 47.82 and SD = 18.77) and April ( M = 45.72 and SD = 16.15), but the post-hoc Tuckey test revealed no significant differences. 3.2.

These values, when compared with the mean of the control, showed that they are highly significant ( p ≤ 0.05), as shown in Figure 10 .

Having one or more chronic medical conditions, being a member of a community of color (African American/black, Hispanic/Latino), and having less income are significant predictors of higher risk perceptions; being female is of near significance ( p = 0.05).

The difference in SE for competence was marginally significant ( p = 0.05).

Binary logistic regression analysis was carried out to ascertain predictors of low resilience, with significance levels set at p ≤ 0.05 or near significance (0.1 > p > 0.05).

There were no differences between control and exposed groups in terms of height, weight, or smoking status ( p = 0.18, 0.20, 0.98, respectively); age was marginally significant ( p = 0.05) with the mean age in the control group slightly higher than that of the exposed group.

The Odds Ratio (OR = 1.58) for asthma is of borderline significance (Fischer’s p -value = 0.051).

The results showed significant improvement in average pain (Pre: 4.00 ± 2.29; Post: 3.18 ± 2.26; p = 0.007), pain interference with walking ability (Pre: 4.14 ± 3.20; Post: 3.09 ± 1.976; p = 0.03), and standard and cognitive Timed Up-and-Go scores (Pre: 13.75 ± 5.34; Post: 12.65 ± 5.25; p = 0.04; Pre: 15.12 ± 6.60; Post: 12.71 ± 5.57; p = 0.003, respectively); the overall pain improvement was trending towards significance (Pre: 3.48 ± 2.56; Post: 2.87 ± 1.85; p = 0.051).

Similar results were observed in the “true” longitudinal subsample where differences between high- and low-risk women nearly reached significance in the second trimester (adjusted p value = 0.051), with high-risk women reporting more depressive symptoms in the second but not in the first or the third trimester ( Supplementary Materials Table S2 ).

An almost significant trend towards higher social extraversion as measured by BBS was also detected after subjects slept in the stone pine bed (0.19 vs. −0.19 units, p = 0.051). 3.3.

Postoperatively (1D), the absolute value of global longitudinal strain (GLS) was greater in the RVP group than in the HBP group ( Table 2 ); however, this difference fell slightly short of significance (16.32 ± 2.57 vs. 14.85 ± 2.52%, p = 0.051).