Of the beetles fed on dung, only time seemed to be marginally significant ( F = 3.32; P = 0.06).
Excerpts
almost significantlyp = 0.06
Furthermore, MPSIIIA brain exhibited significantly higher levels of MIP-1α compared to MPSI brain (p = 0.05) and MPSIIIB brain exhibited almost significantly higher levels of MIP-1α compared to MPSI brain (p = 0.06; Figure 6B ).
There was a significant correlation between relative IHL reduction and relative reduction in HbA1c percentage (ρ = 0.49,p = 0.01); the correlation between absolute changes fell just short of statistical significance (ρ = 0.38,p = 0.06), not surprisingly given the wide range of starting values of IHL, and the strong relationship between the starting IHL and the absolute reduction in IHL (see below).
marginally non-significantp = 0.06
However, in colony pairs 4 and 5, controls were less aggressive; this difference was significant in colony pair 4 (GLM: t 40 = 2.02, p = 0.04) and marginally non-significant in pair 5 (GLM: t 26 = 1.96, p = 0.06).
borderline significancep = 0.060
After adjustment, the risk further decreased to 11-fold (1/0.088) lower, with borderline significance ( p = 0.060).
borderline non-significantp = 0.060
Interpretation of Regression Models 4.1 Knowledge Model The overall model is borderline non-significant (F(3,187) = 2.52, p = 0.060), with R2 = 0.04. • The model explains only 4% of the variance. • Despite this, sex is interpreted as a meaningful predictor.
of borderline significanceP = 0.06
Hence, the group by tract interaction remained unchanged, F(1,23) = 8.67, P<0.01, while the effect of group for the UF remained significant, F(1,22) = 5.11, P = 0.03, although it was of borderline significance (P = 0.06) when correcting for multiple comparisons using the Bonferroni procedure.
However, correlation between nitrate and ( nirS + nirK )/( nosZ I + nosZ II ) was only weakly significant (p = 0.06) ( Table 3 ).
There was a main effect of neuron type (P<.03) but no effect of stimulus (P>0.1) and the interaction just missed significance (P=.06), suggesting that the propensity to burst is more strongly influenced by neuron type than stimulus quality, although both factors may contribute.
almost reached significancep-value = 0.06
[ 25 ] did not find cross-sectional associations with SB, but the longitudinal association almost reached significance (p-value = 0.06).
a trend toward significancep = .06
To evaluate the significant between group differences, we performed independent t-test comparisons and found a significant difference between the two groups for CTOA100 (HP:69.15%, LP:62.18%), t (51) = 2.26, p = .02, and a trend toward significance for the CTOA300 (HP: 49.88%, LP: 41.20%), t (51) = 1.90, p = .06, and CTOA500 (HP: 41.95%, LP: 33.04%), t (51) = 1.7, p = .09, conditions.
Significant difference in SBP change followed by age, BMI and Bonferroni correction was observed at the end of 2 weeks (genotype*gender, P = 0.028), and a marginally significant difference in MAP change at the end of 6 weeks was also observed (genotype*gender, P = 0.060).
We found that FI-TP, but not FI-DES administration, caused significant increases in the expression of INS (P<0.05), PDX1 ( P <0.05), INSR ( P <0.01), and a strong trend in the case of IGF1R ( P = 0.06) ( Fig. 6A ).
difficile (heterogeneity p>0.2; S4 Table ); however, there was a weak trend towards diarrhea since the last sample having a greater effect on acquiring a new toxigenic C . difficile (heterogeneity p = 0.06).
This difference was significant between pT1 and pT3 tumors (p = 0.005), and almost significant between pT1 and pT2 (p = 0.06), and pT1 and pT4 (p = 0.04).
borderline significanceP = 0.06
Carriers of the rs4149601 GG-genotype together with the rs2288774 CC-or CT-genotype, as compared to non-carriers of this combination, displayed significantly lower P-renin and borderline significance for systolic salt sensitivity (P = 0.06–0.08) whereas there was no significance in diastolic salt sensitivity and Nt-proANP ( Table 3 ).
approached significancep = .06
Looking time at face The regression model predicting the difference in looking time at the actor’s face from before to after the ball was stolen approached significance, F (5, 45) = 2.33, p = .06, adj.
near statistical significancep = 0.06
Similar to miR-149, miR-202 expression at baseline was lowest in the ozone + in vivo LPS group, with exposure-dependent effects that were near statistical significance ( Figure 5B ; two-way ANOVA for in vivo exposure and in vitro LPS treatment; p = 0.06 for exposure and p = 0.04 for LPS). miR-202 decreased with in vitro LPS treatment compared to baseline values except in cultures with a history of ozone exposure ( p = 0.06 for ozone alone, p = 0.002 for ozone + in vivo LPS).
showed a trendp = 0.06
Analyses of the MALQOM scores in a subset of patients (n = 30) showed a trend towards a correlation with sensory thresholds in the fingertips (correlation co-efficient r s = −0.342, p = 0.06), but no relationship to thresholds on the hand or dorsum.
In a statistical trend, Rb1 treatment lowered p-IκBα expression in epididymal adipose tissue (−21%; p = 0.06, Fig. 3A ).
showed a trendP = .06
Indeed, Kaplan—Meier survival curves ( Fig 1 ) showed a trend towards lower mortality of Δpsmα - and Δpsmαβhld -infected rabbits ( P = .06).
At child age 5 months the same association was almost significant (p = 0.06).
For example, the crucial interaction between the humanness of the emotion terms and conditions reported by Castano and Giner-Sorolla [ 48 ] is statistically significant in their Study 2 but only marginally significant in Study 1, reported as “ p <.06 ” (p. 808).
borderline significanceP = 0.06
Effects of condition on grams consumed In a repeated ANOVA measures analysis, there was a significant effect of condition (F(1.862) = 5.35, P = 0.01), food type (F(1) = 9.91, P = 0.006), and borderline significance in the interaction term (F(1.79) = 3.2, P = 0.06) in terms of total grams consumed.
We observed that the higher the recorded coverage is, the higher the sensitivity is, and the correlation is marginally significant (p = 0.06).