Barely Significant

Excerpts

27,100 sentences · 1 filter applied

marginally significantP = 0.0481.0× alphagold
The Bonferroni tests indicate that the mean O values of pairs in which both species were non-stygobites (n,n) were significantly higher than those in which both species were stygobites (s,s) ( P < 0.00001) or in which one species was a stygobite and the other one was not (s,n) ( P < 0.00001); mean O values of s,s and s,n pairs were statistically similar ( P = 0.240). The interaction term was marginally significant ( P = 0.048, Table 2 ), which suggests that the different pair types responded differently in the three years.
marginally significantp =.0481.0× alphagold
For the SI group, the model was: \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$\:logit\left(P\right(Y=1\left)\right)=-0.46+0.10X$$\end{document} showing a marginally significant positive slope ( p =.048), while the intercept was not significant ( p =.13).
borderline significantp = 0.0491.0× alphagold
Reverse MR analyses were also performed to examine if BC influences CD40/CD40L levels.A borderline significant association was found between CD40 levels and overall BC risk (IVW OR 1.027, 95% CI 1.000–1.054, p = 0.049), with a more robust association observed for ER-positive BC (OR 1.048, 95% CI 1.016–1.082, p = 0.003).
marginally significantp = 0.0491.0× alphagold
The three-way interaction among site, treatment and client body size was marginally significant (N = 2 177 client interactions, GLMM: χ 2 = 3.86, p = 0.049; Fig. 2 , Supplementary Table S1 ): Cortisol-treated cleaners gave more TS to small clients than saline-treated cleaners but only in high social complexity habitats (Supplementary Figure S3 ).
marginally significantp = 0.0491.0× alphagold
In the comparison of the Backward Speech and No Speech condition, however, due to an overall increased pupil size in the Backward Speech condition we found a significant main effect of Language [ F (1, 23) = 6.629, p = 0.017, η 2 = 0.224], and only a marginally significant interaction of Language and Gaze [ F (1, 23) = 4.336, p = 0.049, η 2 = 0.159].