where P < 0.05 indicates statistical significance [...] was found to be slightly smaller than that of basal cells (−181 ± 21 pA, n = 7, P27–P30) but the difference was not quite significant (P = 0.05)” (PMID 18174213) “... resting activity of A5 neurons was marginally but not significantly higher in toxin-treated rats (0.9 ± 0.2vs. 1.8 ± 0.5 Hz, P = 0.068)” (PMID 22526887) “... significantly smaller than with fura-6F alone (P = 0.009), and slightly smaller than with fura-6F and EGTA (
Excerpts
Sex-specific SI Trends during Growth The interaction effect of categorical age (<6 or ≥6 years) and sex on SI was nominally significant ( p = 0.05).
approached significancep = 0.050
As shown in Fig 5D There were no significant interactions or effects on the total distance to locate the escape hole, although a main effect of group approached significance (F(1,32) = 4.156, p = 0.050 ) with a moderate effect size (η p 2 = 0.115), indicating further exploration is warranted.
We also compared strain-specific nad5 Δ mtDNA transmission biases to starting nad5 Δ mtDNA levels at G0 ( Figure 4b ) and discovered a negative correlation between these two variables (Spearman rank correlation = −0.80) which was weakly significant ( P = 0.05).
Results show that Degree is a negative and marginally significant predictor of the burnout index (ß = -.22, p< .05), while constraint is not (p>.1).
Compared with control NK cells, TGF-beta treated NK cells maintained in culture with LY2157299 showed a slight trend to increased production of TNF-alpha (1.25-fold, p = 0.05) and IFN-gamma (1.06-fold, p = 0.4).
The significance test in UniFrac [44] reported P-Values (Bonferroni corrected) equal to 1e-02 for every pair of samples of both mother and infant sets, meaning that the results are highly significant (if P-values ≤0.05 are considered to be statistical significant).
This difference was marginally statistically significant in 2010–2011 (p = 0.05), but not in 2009–2010 (p = 0.91) or 2011–2012 (p = 0.56).
showed a trendp = 0.05
In this initial trial, young adult neurabin KO mice showed a trend toward reduced immobility compared with matched WT mice ( p = 0.05, Fig 3A ).
The estimated yearly decrease in trachoma in the control communities was -·04%, compared with -0·9% in the intervention communities, and this difference in the rate of change between control and intervention communities was borderline significant (p = 0·05).
borderline significancep = 0.05
All relevant variables retrieved from univariate analysis together with duration of infertility -that showed borderline significance (p = 0.05) on univariate analysis -were subsequently included in the multivariate analysis of factors related to the top quality blastocyst formation rate.
The difference in median score was borderline significant between CUBBITT and the reference text (p-value = 0.05), whereas it was statistically significant between CUBBITT and DeepL (p-value = 0.03), and between CUBBITT and Google Translate (p-value = 0.001).
The interaction between type of stimulus and form of script was marginally significant ( F (1,31) = 4.08, p≤ .05, η p 2 = .12). t -tests suggested significantly longer reaction times in response to the pointed script only in reading of words ( t (31) = 3.29, p <.01).
Unadjusted mean IQ shows a clear trend towards increasing offspring IQ score as parental age increases (p-values<0.05, Table 2 ).
showed a trendP <0.05
Although there were no significant ( P <0.05, Bonferroni correction) differences in the FNCs of the NC and aMCI patients or the MCI and AD patients, AD patients showed a trend toward decreased ( P <0.05, uncorrected) FNC between the aDMN and pDMN compared to the aMCI patients.
close to significancep = 0.05
The difference was significant for five genes ( CD63 , RHOB , LOC399491 , ZNF24 , ANAPC5 ) and close to significance for an additional six (p = 0.05–0.09) ( MAN2A1 , CASP4 , SUPT4H1 , VCP , PARP1 , SSRP1 ) by means of t-tests.
However, there was a borderline significant sex-difference (P = 0.05) in the association between EPA and AO; and EPA was associated with AO (P = 0.03), SAD (P = 0.03), and WC (P = 0.02) in women, when evaluated in sex-specific analyses using multivariable-adjusted models ( S2 and S3 Tables).
Using the 97 th percentile as their threshold for obesity, there was a borderline significant over-transmission of 125W risk allele into obese subjects (P = 0.05).
of borderline significancep-value = 0.05
The strength of this effect weakened across subsequent age periods though the pattern across age periods was not significantly different for women (p-value = 0.2 for interaction) and was of borderline significance for men (p-value = 0.05 for interaction).
Individually significant F st values were only found in pairwise comparisons involving Anchorage Island (Binomial proportions test, P <0.05) and this pattern became even stronger when marginally significant P -values (0.08< P <0.05) were taken into account (14/21 versus 0/15 for comparisons excluding Anchorage; Binomial proportions test, P = 0.0002).
All genotyped markers showed highly significant associations (p<0.05) with obesity ( Fig 2 ).
Microzooplankton biomass, however, differed significantly among treatments (ANOVA, treatment effect: F 5, 28 = 2.4; P = 0.05, block effect: F 5, 28 = 2.2; P>0.05, no interaction effect, Figure 1B ); however, only one planned contrast, which tested the effects of stickleback ecology, was marginally significant (all others P>0.05): the generalist (G) treatment had higher biomass of microzooplankton than the no fish (NF) treatment (planned contrast t-test: t 10.3 = −2.13, P = 0.02, Table 1 ).
More specifically, out of 4,350,741 SNPs that indicated no heterogeneity between studies, those 185,986 SNPs that were nominally significant (p<0.05) and showed the same effect direction in all three studies were considered for the pathway enrichment analysis.
OS showed a borderline significant association with IGKC expression in Kaplan Meier analysis in ER positive carcinomas (Log-rank test: P = 0.050; Fig. 3D ).
When all inflammation markers, significantly associated with breast cancer, were included together in the same model (model I) the risk estimates remained similar (i.e., the effects seemed to be independent of each other), but the association was only borderline significant for IL-1β (p = 0.05).