“marginal significance”

None of the individual predictors reached statistical significance ( p s > 0.13), although barriers to screening approached marginal significance ( B = 0.04, SE = 0.03, p = 0.14).

2A? Response: In Figure 2A (IL-1β), the response to pm-PM2.5 was 3.3-fold above control, with marginal significance (p = 0.14).

Post-hoc two samples t -tests (one-tailed) for each stimulus class revealed that musicians relative to non-musicians exhibited significantly narrower temporal integration windows for sinewave speech [ t (39) = 2.34, p = 0.025; one-tailed p = 0.01] and piano music [ t (39) = 4.74, p < 0.001], and a marginal significance for natural speech [ t (39) = 1.49, p = 0.14; one-tailed p = 0.07].

The same pattern is seen when three participants who detected the manipulation were excluded, with the exception that the intercept for the liking ratings in Experiment 1b now failed to reach marginal significance ( t = 1.519, p = .142).

Besides, concomitant ATM MUT and gene fusions were correlated with lymph node metastasis, with marginal significance ( p = 0.143) (Fig. 2 B).

Predictors not reaching significance (or marginal significance) included material status (OR = 0.70, P = 0.148), household deprivation (OR = 0.94, P = 0.266), urban/rural location (OR = 0.57, P = 0.092), self-rated health (OR = 1.27, P = 0.087).

Statistical significance was determined at p-value of <0.05 and marginal significance at p-value of <0.15.

Variables that achieved statistical significance ( P < 0.05) or marginal significance ( P < 0.15) on univariate analysis were entered into a multivariate Cox proportion hazard model to identify significant independent factors.

However, marginal significance was observed in the comparison between ICDAS II scores and those generated by laser-induced fluorescence devices ( p = 0.15), as depicted in Figure 5 .

Covariates with marginal significance ( P < 0.15) were included in the multivariate logistic regression analysis using a stepwise model selection method.

Statistical significance was set to p ≤0.05, and marginal significance was set to 0.05< p ≤0.15.

Among the thirteen lncRNAs, ENST00000671612.1 correlated with worse refractory free survival (RFS); p value = 0.01; and HR = 2.0 (1.1–3.7), as presented in Figure 10 a,b, while ENST00000520619.1 exhibited marginal significance in predicting RFS ( p = 0.15, supplementary Figure S1 ).

With these two factors taken into account, water which showed only marginal significance in the exploratory analyses was no longer significant ( χ 2 1 = 2.046, P = 0.153).

Again, occupation (farmer/other) showed a negative association with infection probability though with marginal significance (OR = 0.61, 95 % CI: 0.35–1.06) with a p-value = 0.17.

Either CAP exposure or IBRV infection triggered IRF3 and IRF7 overexpression; yet CAP significantly reduced the increased level of IRF7 on IBRV infection back to normal (p = 0.021 for IRF7 at 2-min CAP, p = 0.018 for IRF7 at 4-min CAP, Figure 6a ), and suppressed IRF3 expression with marginal significance (p = 0.171 for IRF3 at 2-min CAP, p = 0.077 for IRF3 at 4-min CAP, Figure 6b ).

Despite the significant reduction in the analgesic score post-treatment ( P = 0.0031), the QLQ-H&N35 revealed only marginal significance concerning the intake of pain killers ( P = 0.1723).

Consequently, 2-miR + ly model was superior to serum SCC antigen with great significance (P = 0.01) and to ly, and clinical T stage with marginal significance (P = 0.18, 0.07, respectively).

Females demonstrated weaker associations—ALT (β = −0.97, p = 0.031) and γ-GTP (β = −1.60, p = 0.015) reached marginal significance, while AST did not (β = −0.51, p = 0.181).

2 ), with marginal significance ( p = 0.189 and 0.059, respectively).

First, univariable Cox proportional hazards regression identified variables with marginal significance ( P < .2).

Other factors with marginal significance ( p < 0.2) in bivariable analysis of peak cortisol were sex (male vs female, p = 0.182) and time of testing (after vs before 12:00 PM, p = 0.17); both factors were negatively associated with peak cortisol.

Significance was set at P < 0.1 and marginal significance at P < 0.2.

Variables demonstrating marginal significance ( p < 0.20) were subsequently entered into multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models employing backward elimination.

Variables with a marginal significance ( P ≤ 0.20) in the univariate analyses were included in a multivariable binary logistic regression model to identify unique associations with NP symptoms.

Variables marginal significance ( p < 0.2) in univariable logistic regression analysis were included in multivariable logistic regression model.