“marginal significance”

Aerobic exercise (1 study) showed marginal significance (SMD = −0.43, 95% CI [−0.85, 0.00], p = 0.05).

Of the five pairwise joint models including eight unique genes, all the associations were attenuated below the TWAS significance level, but retained marginal significance (p < 0.05).

Notably, residential PSA exhibited a negative correlation with the level of myopia, albeit with marginal significance ( r =-0.189, P = 0.05).

However, a marginal significance is observed in the interaction between adherence status and age (F = 3.093, p = 0.050), hinting at a potential joint impact on hallucination symptoms.

Male hamsters exhibited a weaker positive linear association that reached marginal significance (p < 0.05).

Anemia remained a significant factor associated with the functional disability when assessed according to mRS >3 (adjusted OR = 2.36; 95% CI = 1.1–5.1), in contrast to the marginal significance observed when assessed according to composite index (adjusted OR = 2.19; 95% CI = 1.01–4.75) and no relationship according to BI ( P > 0.05).

Regarding the ASI, subjects with the G/G genotype showed higher ASI levels than those with the T/T genotype with marginal significance (19.78 ± 11.90 vs. 15.48 ± 9.59, P = 0.05).

( 2017 ) reported marginal significance ( p = .05 and p = .06).

NBRM The NBRM applied to the regions of the European part of the RF (Zone 1 at Figure 1 ) identified the following significant factors associated with the intensity of ASF outbreaks among wild boars: the proportion of forest cover, the number of ASF outbreaks in domestic pigs, and the density of the wild boar population (the latter with a marginal significance level of p =0.05) ( Table 2 ).

Model 4c shows that inclusion of depressive symptoms, lifestyle factors, and chronic health conditions simultaneously attenuated the HR even further toward 1.0 and reduced the association between everyday discrimination and risk of mortality to marginal significance (HR = 1.07, 95% CI = [1.00, 1.13], p ≤ .05).

Several other associations reached marginal significance ( p > 0.05, p < 0.10).

The first three parameters were significantly related to prognosis (p = 0.043, p = 0.033, and p = 0.002, respectively), while TRG displayed marginal significance (p = 0.050).

Furthermore, in the subgroup analysis, pre-therapeutic serum GGT level had marginal significance for RFS ( Table 4 ; HR, 5.26; p = 0.050; 95% CI, 1.00–27.61) and DFS ( Table 4 ; HR, 5.19; p = 0.050; 95% CI, 1.00–26.96) among hormone receptor (ER and PR)-positive patients but not among HER-2-positive patients.

The linear trend remained significant after multivariable adjustment ( P = 0.03), with marginal significance in the highest versus lowest tertile group (HR = 11.96 (0.96–149.21), P = 0.05) (Fig. 3 ).

While Group 3 presented with the longest symptom duration and highest medication use at baseline, multivariate regression analysis identified advancing age as an independent predictor of more limited improvement in post-void residual volume ( p = 0.008) and IIEF-5 scores ( p < 0.001), while its association with ∆ Q max reached only marginal significance ( p = 0.050).

Higher cholesterol was associated with a steeper slope of decline in attention and working memory ( P < .001), and marginal significance for verbal memory ( P = .05; Supplementary Table 2 ).

Elevated WBC counts showed marginal significance (OR: 1.5; p=0.05), while serum amylase was not a significant predictor.

The FG, TCHOL, TG, and HDL levels showed marginal significance in differences between clusters and in those with diabetes, which were reproducible in the discovery and validation cohorts ( P < 0.05; Supplementary Fig. 3 and Supplementary Table 1 ).

The comparison of the mean of phase angle according to the three cAIx75 tertiles showed a marginal significance ( p = 0.050).

Each 1-SD increase in log-transformed irisin was significantly associated with higher odds of MetS in Model 1 (OR 1.34; 95% CI 1.08–1.69; p = 0.009) and Model 3 (OR 1.35; 95% CI 1.02–1.80; p = 0.04), while showing marginal significance in Model 2 (OR 1.32; 95% CI 1.00–1.74; p = 0.05).

The genome‐wide significant SNPs explained approximately 6% of the variance in age at natural menopause, and the variance explained increased to 21% using independent SNPs with at least marginal significance ( p < .05).

The difference in trifecta achievement rates between the two groups showed marginal significance (p = 0.05).

The following variables had multivariable significance: introduced Boer breed goats (OR = 6.9; 95% CI 1.7, 27.3, p<0.001); goats 3 years or older (OR 4.1; 95% CI 1.3, 12.5, p = 0.004); and goats located in Vientiane Capital had marginal significance (OR 5.4; 95% CI 1.0, 29.3, p = 0.05) ( Table 2 ).

In this study, tumor size exhibited marginal significance in univariate analysis ( p = 0.05), prompting reflection on the limitations of traditional statistical thresholds ( p < 0.05).

However, between group showed insignificant results p > 0.05 in MPR group, whereas MET shows marginal significance in only in pain intensity p < 0.05 [ 24 ].