“a marginal trend”

None of the two-way interactions involving association reached significance, though the three-way interaction between association, category congruence, and target type showed a marginal trend (logit estimate = 0.10, SE = 0.06, p =.081).

In multivariable analysis, CA 15-3 (OR 1.053, p=0.002) and CEA (OR 1.264, p=0.001) independently predicted PET positivity, whereas CA 125 showed a marginal trend (p=0.081).

Our data showed a marginal trend ( p = 0.081) of decreasing negative fraction of cortical coverage with age (Figure 2C ).

Of the 12 measures, only Slide Step Right showed a statistically significant interaction (F(4,112) = 2.87, p = 0.026, η 2 = 0.093), while Backward Speed demonstrated only a marginal trend ( p = 0.081).

The interaction between valence and load showed a marginal trend, F (1, 24) = 3.32, p = 0.081, η2 p = 0.12.

After 24 hours’ incubation, the extent of MRSA destruction following treatment with low concentrations (<20 mg/L) of any of the GNP solutions was close to a marginal trend toward statistical significance (p = 0.081).

We observed no significant effect ( p > 0.1) except for a marginal trend towards a higher degree for participants in pairs with strong leadership (F(1,92) = 3.121, p = 0.081, partial η 2 = 0.033).

The analysis of whether the current pregnancy is the first one for the respondents shows a marginal trend towards significance (p = 0.082) suggesting a possible variation in family planning or birth intervals that does not reach conventional levels of statistical significance, but is still shaping migration processes (See Table 3 ).

Single marital status did not achieve strict statistical significance but showed a marginal trend effect associated with an elevated risk for high Depersonalization (aOR = 1.85, p = 0.083).

As shown in Figure 4 B, although ethanol did not produce a statistically significant difference in Hsp70 levels, there is a marginal trend towards being elevated 24 h after ethanol treatment ( p = 0.084).

We found that axial diffusivity, indexing axonal integrity, was significantly reduced in AD ( p = 0.016, Cohen’s d = 1.004) while in the retina, only a marginal trend for significance was found for the outer plexiform layer ( p = 0.084, Cohen’s d = 0.688).

Although Worry showed a marginal trend at the 1-month mark ( p = 0.084) in re-admitted patients, this difference dissipated by the end of the 12-month follow-up.

Survival analysis revealed that patients with high FAM20C ( FAM20C high ) levels had significantly worse OS (log-rank P = 2 × 10 -2 , HR = 1.4), although disease-free survival showed only a marginal trend ( P = 8.4 × 10 -2 ) (Fig. 6 D and E).

The interaction term showed a marginal trend toward statistical significance for the comparison between the high and low alexithymia groups (P = 0.085).

On the other hand, the overweight females presented only with a marginal trend towards increased risk for meningioma (pooled RR = 1.11, 95%CI: 0.99–1.25, p = 0.085, nine study arms, I 2 = 8.3%, Fig G in S1 File ).

The no-chemotherapy group showed a marginal trend toward increased mortality risk (HR = 3.208, p = 0.085), although this did not reach statistical significance.

Group × Foot × Segment showed a marginal trend (F(1.71,49.53) = 2.65, p = 0.088, ηp 2 = 0.08; Figure A8 ).

CAP did not show a significant association with CHD in either gender, although a marginal trend was noted in males (p = 0.088).

(Table 4 ) Generalized Estimating Equation (GEE) analysis Across all models, age did not significantly predict any periodontal outcome, although a marginal trend toward reduced plaque levels with increasing age was observed (β = -0.0025, p = 0.089).

There was also a marginal trend for a main effect of Scenario (F2, 56 = 2.49; p = 0.09).

Catenibacterium tended to be negatively associated with zonulin ( p = 0.02), and there was a marginal trend for negative association with BMI ( p = 0.09), suggesting that lower relative abundance of Catenibacterium might be correlated with increased gut permeability and obesity.

In contrast, countries with an established quality programme showed a marginal trend towards higher median [IQR] SU admission proportions (78.9% [63.3%–89.4%] vs 59.0% [25.0%–88.1%], P = .09; Figure 3 ), higher IVT treatment proportions (16.1% [11.0%–21.7%] vs 10.3% [8.6%–15.0%], P = .07), as well as shorter DTN times ( Figure S10 ).

We observed a marginal trend for the condition by EMG RMS interaction effect (F(2, 435) = 1.67, p = 0.09, Cohen’s F = 0.09, p 1−β = 0.45).

However, the linear perception trend showed a marginal trend (Coefficient = − 0.26, SE = 0.15, P = 0.09), indicating that individuals who do not perceive owls negatively do not necessarily mean that they view owls as ecologically important species (Table 4 ).

However, a considerable portion of the variance remained unexplained ( R 2 = 0.41), and 19% of participants (95CI: 10–28%) misreported their behaviour, t (74) = −4.12, p < 0.001, but participants' tendency to misreport safety voice acts over safety silence was only a marginal trend, OR = 2.78, Wald (1) = 2.48, p = 0.09 (bootstrap sample = 1,000).