Regarding the temperature data ( Figure 2 B), an interaction between day and LPS was observed (F2,92 = 3.267; p < 0.05; partial η 2 = 0.608), not found in day (F2,92 = 1.201; n.s.) nor LPS effect (F1,46 = 0.855; n.s.) alone; an effect close to significance was found 24 h after injection in temperature (F1,46 = 3.972; p = 0.052; partial η 2 = 0.496), but disappeared at 48 h (F1,46 = 0.019; n.s.).
This association was attenuated after adjustment for age and sex and became marginally non-significant (adjusted OR = 2.47, 95% CI: 1.00–6.14, p = 0.052). 4.
In contrast, the simple effect of optimism was marginally significant, F (3, 1631) = 2.58, p = 0.052, η 2 p = 0.005.
While overall, partners of participants who installed Milk Man were less likely to have ceased exclusive breastfeeding at any time point from birth to six weeks postpartum, this result was modest and of borderline significance (log rank test p = 0.052; Breslow p = 0.046; Tarone-Ware p = 0.049).
Stagnant water in premises was marginally significant across sub-districts (χ 2 = 12.495, df = 6, p = 0.052) and was reported in fewer yards (13.4%) as opposed to those without (85.8%).
Examination of simple effects ( Table 5 ) revealed that for the self-esteem and empathy variables, there was a statistically significant increase in the means from pre-test to post-test in the intervention group ( p < 0.001), and a marginally significant change in the control group ( p = 0.052 and 0.058, respectively).
Finally, physical strength had a negative trend prediction on sitting time (β = −0.05, p = 0.052).
SCH had a marginally significant effect on OT ( β = 0.08, p = 0.052) ( Table 2 ).
Compared with Australian-born workers, all other migrant groups tended to have a lower risk of mental health outcomes, but the differences were not statistically significant, although, for workers from Arabic-speaking countries, the difference approached significance ( p < 0.052).
When the ATP assay was used, the cleanliness pass rate based on the criterion of 5 RLU/cm 2 was improved from 39% to 52% after the introduction of the new cleaning process, but the level of change was only at the edge of significance ( p = 0.052).
Prior training also showed a trend toward favorable attitude levels ( p = 0.052), with 69.2% of those with high attitude scores having received training, compared to 33.3% in the unfavorable category.
When Cox regressions were applied separately to subgroup of physical fitness parameters, 12 min running test was borderline significant (hazard ratio, HR: 0.998, 95% CI: 0.996–1.00002, p = 0.052) ( Table 3 ).
Although not significant, Protocol × Time interaction for CMJ and ΔCMJ were almost significant ( p = 0.052 and p = 0.057, respectively), speculating that the results might have been different if the sample size was larger.
The relation between gender and percentage of LTs or TLDs approached significance (χ 2 (1, N = 108) = 3.782; p = 0.052) suggesting a trend toward a higher probability to be LT among males than females.
As presented in Table 5 , being diagnosed with hypertension and CVD along with the number of medical diagnoses were shown to have a statistically significant lower score on the EQ-5D-5L ( p = 0.019, p = 0.017, and p < 0.001, respectively), although the differences in median was borderline significant for hypertension ( p = 0.052) and not significant for number of diagnoses ( p = 0.150).
The overall model was marginally significant at p = 0.052 with adjusted r 2 of 6.3%.
Subsequent ANCOVAs performed on individual gait variables showed that the main effect was significant for mean stride length ( F (1,128) = 4.32, p = 0.040, η p 2 = 0.03) and marginally significant for mean speed ( p = 0.052), with a significant interaction with physical activity for both variables (mean stride length F (1,128) = 9.95, p = 0.002, η p 2 = 0.07; mean speed F (1,128) = 6.94, p = 0.009, η p 2 = 0.05).
Finally, to know at what time the differences between the groups occurred, we proceeded to calculate the estimates between the group factor and time, finding significant differences with respect to personal responsibility ( p = 0.022) and differences very close to significance for social responsibility ( p = 0.052) with a medium effect size (η 2 = 0.068) in favour of the control group in the pre-test, and the violence observed showed significant differences in favour of the experimental group in the post-test ( p = 0.016).
A larger number of subjects might allow additional information about the other microelements to be gathered, perhaps resolving situations with borderline significance, such as the Ca/Mg ratio that was higher in ASD children ( p = 0.052), and V, S ( p = 0.076), and Zn ( p = 0.09) that were lower in ASD children with respect to controls. 5.
In addition, not living with parents during university semesters displayed borderline significance ( p = 0.052) for daily/occasional smoking.
Women reporting milk intake ≥2 times weekly had higher HbA1c than those reporting intake <2 times, although borderline significant (5.9 ± 0.8% and 5.7 ± 0.9%, respectively, p = 0.052).
The interaction between the two factors approached significance, F(1.200) = 3.817, p = 0.052, with a small effect size (η 2 p = 0.019; Cohen’s f = 0.14).
The Level-2 slope of 0.51, trending toward significance ( p = 0.052), suggested that the size of the association between peer and youth drinking may increase linearly across strata ( Figure 2 ).
For example, while only the OA > Infect and Recover yielded a statistically significant difference in preference type by two of these variables (ever having contracted a respiratory viral infection at work ( p = 0.003) and knowing anyone who has contracted a respiratory viral infection at work ( p = 0.03)), some scenarios had nearly statistically significant associations (OA = Infect and Recover, knowing someone who has died from a respiratory viral infection from work: p = 0.052; OA = Infect and Death, knowing someone who has contracted a respiratory viral infection from work: p = 0.06) ( Table 4 ).
Furthermore, the analyses revealed a marginally significant positive association between the percentage of streets within 100 m and overweight/obesity (OR = 1.09 (95% CI 1.00–1.18), p = 0.052).