Barely Significant

Excerpts

5,163 sentences · 1 filter applied

marginally significantp = 0.0511.0× alphagold
Within a constrained range (scaled V 3 < 0.8), time pressure exhibited a marginally significant interaction with contextual variance ( β = 0.46, s.e. = 0.23, t = 1.95, p = 0.051, standardized coefficient = 0.08, 95% C.I. = [0, .15]) — a pattern consistent with the model prediction of a flatter early noise effect under high time pressure due to early-late noise tradeoff.
showed a trendP =0.0511.0× alpha
In correspondence with increased selfing, hoverfly-pollinated plants showed a trend towards reduction in pistil length ( Supplementary Table 2 ; P =0.051), and a significant decrease in the emission of the three scent compounds methyl salicylate, p -anisaldehyde and indole ( Table 1 ; Supplementary Table 2 and Fig. 4c ).
borderline significantP =0.0511.0× alphagold
These 40 consensus modules were significantly related to cortisol stress reactivity in the discovery sample (multiple analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) Pillai's trace=0.72, F(40,37)=2.4, P =0.004) and borderline significant in the cross-tissue replication sample (MANCOVA Pillai's trace=0.21, F(40,212)=1.4, P =0.051).
borderline non-significantp = 0.0521.0× alpha
To test if this preference for high calorie food differed between groups, a linear mixed effects model revealed a small, borderline non-significant main effect of calorie level (high vs. low) on stimulus value ratings ( β calorie level = 0.02 ± 0.01, t(506) = 1.95, p = 0.052, 95% CI [2.20e-4 to 0.05]) and a significant main effect of group ( β group = 0.09 ± 0.03, t(506) = 2.71, p < 0.001, 95% CI [0.02–0.15]).
In addition, GATA3 significantly repressed ‘stem cell' genes whose downregulation is essential for further T cell development ( LMO2 , MEF2C and SPI1 ) 33 34 , and/or that are involved in the development of other haematopoietic lineages such as CD79A for B cell development (downregulation of EBF1 , expressed at low levels, was observed but just failed to reach significance, P =0.052) and ID2 for NK-lineage differentiation 35 ( Fig. 5e , Supplementary Data 1 ).
a negative trendP =0.0521.0× alphagold
During the probe period, however, stronger face evidence scores were associated with more accurate responses to the face probe (20–24 s, P =0.013); a similar trend was present for the relative face–scene scores (that is, a negative trend for scene–face; P =0.052).
marginally significantP = 0.0521.0× alphagold
Next, focusing on PGC1.5 women only, a comparison to UKB showed significant genetic correlations with the overall UKB ( r g = 0.46, P = 0.0004) and UKB women ( r g = 0.46, P = 0.0008), and a slightly lower, but marginally significant correlation with the smaller UKB male data ( r g = 0.44, P = 0.052).