“marginal significance”

Statistical significance was defined as p<0.05; marginal significance was defined as p<0.10.

For variables with marginal significance (0.05 < P < 0.1) in multivariate analysis (i.e., comorbidity count ≥2 types, operative time >180 min), we retained them in the final model based on two criteria: (1) clinical plausibility—previous studies have confirmed that multimorbidity (≥2 comorbidities) increases physiological stress in elderl

The negative association between log(uMMA) and eGFR was observed with marginal significance in both the 2001 sample (b = −2.13, p = 0.10) and the 2003 sample (b = −4.48, p = 0.06).

We defined statistical significance at p<0.05 and marginal significance at p<0.10.

Statistically significant improvements ( p < 0.05) were observed in 25 of these comparisons, with an additional one showing marginal significance (0.05 ≤ p < 0.1).

7 experimental days or 7 meal components), marginal significance ( P <0.1) is also indicated so the reader will be able to reach own conclusions about these results.

At T1, the total aboveground plant dry mass was influenced by the irrigation treatment, being significantly lower in cd compared to ctr plants and slightly higher (marginal significance, p < 0.1) in cd compared to pd plants (Fig. 2A , Table 2 ).

Marginal significance was set at P ≤ .10 to detect differences that may be clinically relevant and warrant further analysis in future studies with larger sample sizes.

We used STATA 13/SE (StataCorp, College Station, Texas, USA) for all statistical analyses and multiple imputations with the statistical significance set at p<0.05 and the marginal significance set at p<0.10.

In the comparison, we filtered the variables with statistical significance ( P < 0.05) or marginal significance ( P < 0.1).

The corresponding full model (including socioeconomic, cognitive, and risk preference variables) was also significant (R 2 = .18, p<.001), but the negative association of overall correct choices with debt-to-asset ratio was reduced to marginal significance (β = −0.82, t = −1.85, p<.10).

We observed a two-fold higher risk of infection for children living in houses with suitable walls for triatomines than for children living in houses without them, with marginal significance ( P = 0.1).

DeClust subtypes were ranked the highest among all methods assessed here, suggesting that DeClust subtypes were more likely driven by cancer cell-intrinsic properties (with statistical significance p < 0.05 or marginal significance p < 0.1 in Fig. 5 a, b).

The model explained 20.9% of the variance in K6 scores at post-intervention with marginal significance ( p = 0.10).

The interaction of intergroup team-member exchange reached the marginal significance level (β = 0.378, p < 0.1); this indicates that the prevention regulatory focus still moderates the indirect relationship between team-member exchange and individual job crafting.

Predictors exhibiting marginal significance (P>0.1) in the final multivariate model were excluded.

Results for hypothesis 1 approached marginal significance with a Mann-Whitney U non-parametric t test ( p = .10).

The researchers observed that MP/S + tumors were observed to have a marginal significance (HR =1.52; 95% CI: 0.92–2.51; P=0.10).

VA by race showed marginal significance (p=0.1), with Whites having the highest VA (40%), followed by Blacks (32%) and Hispanics (20%).

Subsequently, the binary logistic regression analysis was performed in which nurse‐patient dispute (Yes = 1, No = 0) was the dependent variable and indicators with statistical significance ( p < .05) and marginal significance ( p < .1) in the univariate analysis were included as independent variables to determine the factors influencing the dispute.

In all cases, the significance level was set at p < 0.05, and the marginal significance was set at p < 0.1.

Self‐efficacy showed marginal significance in class 2 ( p < 0.1) but without significant difference between‐class. 4.4.

All statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS (v24, IBM Corp, Armonk, NY) and statistical significance was accepted at p < 0.05 and marginal significance was accepted at 0.05 ≤ p < 0.10.

Statistical significance levels were set at p < 0.05, and marginal significance p < 0.1 [ 40 ].

Although the BC interaction shows marginal significance (0.05 < p < 0.10), suggesting some interactive effect, it may be conditionally retained.