Excerpts

A strong association was also observed between adolescents’ BMI and the BMI of the mother ( p = 0.004), but the association was only of borderline significance with the BMI of the father ( p = 0.08).

Almost significant group by time interactions were observed for body mass ( p = 0.08, ES = 0.23) and body mass index ( p = 0.054, ES = 0.27).

Model 5a showed that for rural-to-urban migrants, having more local friends were associated with higher frequency of drinking (b = 0.58, 95% [0.10, 1.06]; p < 0.05); this association remained marginally significant even when trans-local ties were included (Model 5b: b = 0.47, 95% CI = [−0.06, 0.99]; p = 0.08).

In central DBP, the difference between the two groups showed a trend ( p = 0.08) in favor of the EX 45 min after exercise ( Figure 4 ). 4.

2.39 μg/dL), though this difference was only marginally significant ( p = 0.08) [ 79 ].

Closer evaluation of the trends for the F90 females ( n = 12) indicated greater methylphenidate adherence when taken concurrently with antidepressants, with this result approaching significance ( p = 0.08).

Variables with p ≤ 0.001 were reported as highly significant, and those with p ≤ 0.08, also retained in the final model, were reported as marginally significant.

Concerning avoidance behavior, there was only a marginally significant, but inconclusive effect of health anxiety during COVID-19 on avoidance behavior in relation to other diseases ( b = 0.03, 99% CI [−0.01, 0.06], p = 0.08).

For alcohol consumption during pregnancy, a borderline significant difference ( p = 0.08) among the regions was found, possibly explained by only one person’s (from the North region) consumption of >2–3 times a month.A significant difference was found among the regions for parity, defined as a full-term pregnancy, with a higher median in the East region.

The only finding that approached significance was a trend towards a reduction in anxiety ( p = 0.08) for the aquarium group compared to the no-aquarium group; no results were found in measures of depression, fear and frustration.

In these multivariable logistic regressions, gender was near significance ( p = 0.08) in Rishon LeZion and sedentary behavior was near significance ( p = 0.09) in Haifa (values not presented), suggesting boys had a higher chance of being overweight and obese in Rishon LeZion and the sedentary had a higher chance of being overweight and obese in Haifa. 4.

Grade effect: For the overt victimization, univariate ANOVA indicated that the main effect of grade was marginally significant (F (1,1040) = 2.27, p = 0.08, η p 2 = 0.007).

Analysis of change in PM alone showed a benefit to the intervention group (three studies, N = 340, SMD = −0.33, CI: [−0.62, −0.05], p = 0.02), while analysis of change in air nicotine alone showed a trend towards a benefit to the intervention group (air nicotine change: four studies, N = 421, p = 0.08).

After adjustment for baseline scores, this difference in recovery between the conditions, as indicated by the interaction between scene type (green, built) and block (3, 5) on RSA, was marginally significant, p = 0.08, η p 2 = 0.1.

Although the change in VL thickness did not quite reach statistical significance ( p = 0.08), the change observed in the present study was close to that reported in other studies at similar locations [ 35 , 54 , 55 ].

Secondhand smoke exposure showed marginal significance with increased neighborhood traffic ( p = 0.08), and children with any household pet (dog and/or cat) were less likely to be exposed to neighborhood traffic ( p = 0.02) but after adjusting for demographics and family history of asthma this was no longer statistically significant.

Although only about 10% of women reported eating fish caught by someone they knew, we still found a marginally significant association between higher blood mercury levels and eating caught fish (p = 0.08).

However, the differences among the job categories was marginally non-significant ( p = 0.081).

They did however find a marginally significant interaction ( p = 0.081), which might be a chance finding, between walkability and talking with neighbours for the prediction of sedentary time.

The repeated-measures ANOVA indicated that the effect of time was not statistically significant (Wilks’ λ = 0.998, F (1,166) = 0.338, p = 0.562, η p 2 = 0.002); nevertheless, a significant effect of the time × group interaction emerged (Wilks’ λ = 0.946, F (1,166) = 9.459, p = 0.002, η p 2 = 0.05): there was a significant difference over time (i.e., increasing) for the experimental group (Wilks’ λ = 0.929, F (1,104) = 7.922, p = 0.006, η p 2 = 0.07) and a near-significant difference over time (i.e., decreasing) for the control group (Wilks’ λ = 0.952, F (1,62) = 3.152, p = 0.081, η p 2 = 0.05).

Whether mothers thought that people helped each other out was associated with reduced hazards of stopping exclusive breastfeeding in the constant effects models, approaching significance once SES was controlled for (M2 HR 0.65, p = 0.081).

PM Concentrations and Their Correlations In the comparison of PM 10 , PM 2.5–10 , and PM 2.5 concentrations among lag days, PM 10 and PM 2.5–10 concentrations were significantly different among lag days for both original and log-transformed concentrations ( p < 0.05 for all), while PM 2.5 concentrations were not significantly different among lag days; although, original values showed marginal significance ( p = 0.0812) ( Figure 1 ).

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.

On the other hand, with regard to the number of teeth, the results of the multiple logistic regression analysis ( Table 3 and Table 4 ) show a marginally significant association with 20–27 teeth in women (OR: 1.62, 95% CI: 0.94–2.80, p = 0.082, reference: 0–9 teeth); otherwise, no statistically significant association was observed.

The lockdown did not lead to a significant decrease in fractures but, instead, yielded a highly significant increase in mild traumatic brain injuries when compared to all injuries that occurred ( p = 0.082 and p = 0.0001) as well as acute injuries (excluding contusions, distortions and miscellaneous non-acute injuries) ( p = 0.309 and p = 0.034).