Barely Significant

Excerpts

5,163 sentences · 1 filter applied

nominally significantP < 0.051.0× alphagold
In stage 2, we examined the 28 lead SNPs from stage 1 in the Asian-specific meta-analysis ( n = 8107) and found that 16, including the novel lead SNPs within or close to ADAMTS8 and DCN , were significant after Bonferroni correction ( P ≤ 1.79 × 10 −3 , 0.05/28), further three other SNPs including the two novel close to STAG1 and NDUFAF6 were nominally significant ( P < 0.05).
a statistical trendp < 0.051.0× alphagold
The overall firing rate correlations with trial outcomes increased after outcome onset and was stronger in the Guanfacine than vehicle condition in dlPFC, striatum and with a statistical trend in the ACC (Fig. 3A ; permutation test, dlPFC: p < 0.05 during 0.5–0.6s; striatum: p < 0.05 during 0.05–0.3s; ACC: p < 0.075 during 0.4–0.45s).
approached significanceP -value < 0.051.0× alpha
While none passed multiple testing correction, mainly because of a lack of power since we have a limited sample size in an analysis with thousands of parameters (clones), we could observe that the few clones that approached significance ( P -value < 0.05) were shared across patients only in PR group and enriched at 24 months post transplant.
nominally significantP < 0.051.0× alphagold
We provided detailed RegulomeDB annotations in relevant cell types (e.g., hematopoietic multipotent progenitor cells, CD34+ hematopoietic progenitor cells, any primary B-cell, lymphoblastoid cell lines from 1000 Genomes [i.e., GM19238], K562, NAMALWA, BLaER1) for: (a) all index variants; and (b) credible set variants with nominally significant ( P < 0.05) functional probability scores.
T/F viruses with incompletely closed Envs were also more sensitive to sCD4, although this difference did not reach statistical significance ( P = 0.05; Supplementary Fig. 3d ); and we observed a significant correlation between cold and sCD4 sensitivity ( P = 0.0005; Fig. 1f ).
marginally significantP < 0.051.0× alphagold
While only variants with P < 5 × 10 −8 were considered significant, to also identify suggestive variants for supplementary results, in each clump, index SNPs had a suggestive association based on P < 1×10 −6 , and SNPs were added if they were marginally significant with P < 0.05, were within 500 kb of the index SNP, and had r 2 > 0.1 with the index SNP.
borderline significantp = 0.051.0× alphagold
A linear mixed effects model fitted to stimulus value ratings (i.e., how much participants wanted to eat the food items) found a main effect of group ( ß = 0.10, SE = 0.03, p = 0.003, 95% CI [0.03–0.16]), controlled for BMI, which had a borderline significant effect on stimulus value ratings ( ß = 0.01, SE = 0.006 p = 0.05, 95% CI [−0.0002 to 0.02]).