Barely Significant
← all phrases

“a marginal trend”

627 sentences · 627 papers · 966 search hits before verification · confirmed specimen

Sighted at

p=0.09

Listed by Hankins (2013) · Otte et al. (2022)

In the literature

a marginal trendp=0.0731.5× alphagold
Urban residence demonstrated a marginal trend (p=0.073), with all four positive cases residing in urban areas (7.4% prevalence in urban residents versus 0% in rural residents), which is compatible with the possibility of higher TB exposure in densely populated urban settings but cannot be confirmed from our data.
a marginal trendp = 0.0731.5× alphagold
Consistent with this interpretation, tests of multivariate dispersion did not detect significant heterogeneity among ENSO groups for Aitchison distances (betadisper, p = 0.191) or Jensen–Shannon distances ( p = 0.101), whereas Bray–Curtis showed only a marginal trend ( p = 0.073).
a marginal trendp = 0.0741.5× alphagold
Finally, there was a marginal trend for geminate fricatives to have a lower mean Harmonic-to-Noise ratio (HNR) than singleton fricatives (0.8 < 4.0 dB), t (14) = 1.91, p = 0.074, i.e., to be “noisier.” The same trend was found with the vowel preceding /t:/ compared to /t/ (9.7 < 12.7 dB), t (22) = 1.93, p = 0.063.
a marginal trendP = .0771.5× alphagold
[ 39 , 40 ] However, other studies in general critical care populations, [ 33 , 41 , 42 ] as well as our adjusted TBI-specific analysis, found no statistically significant association between lower vitamin D levels and nosocomial infection, though our data showed a marginal trend ( P = .077).
a marginal trendp = 0.0771.5× alphagold
Our findings suggest that both types of novelty were represented in the memorability subspace following event boundaries, with strong evidence for co-occurrence novelty (R2 difference = 0.23, p = 0.009, from a one-sided permutation test) and a marginal trend for valence novelty (R2 difference = 0.10, p = 0.077), but not preceding them (co-occurrence novelty: R 2 difference = 0.03, p = 0.212; valence novelty: R 2 difference = −0.04, p = 0.892) (Fig. 5C , Supplementary Fig. 7A , B ).