“marginal significance”

In all statistical analyses, p -values < 0.05 and < 0.1 were considered to indicate significance and marginal significance, respectively.

However, due to the current limited sample size, the statistical power would be inadequate, as shown by the aforementioned marginal significance even in the only positive association between HAMD17 and DAO after the Bonferroni correction in the sample of the 305 chronic medicated patients.

Independent variables were selected as factors exhibiting statistical or marginal significance in univariate analysis.

First, while SOFA ( p = 0.029), SI ( p = 0.050), and diabetes ( p = 0.05) demonstrated marginal significance in univariate analysis, their inclusion in the final model was justified by their non-zero coefficients in the LASSO regression, which indicates their independent predictive value despite their borderline p -values.

In this analysis, we found a trend with marginal significance for set of countries that vaccinated more rapidly, showing that the higher the average national age, the higher the excess mortality.

In contrast, rs2583988 showed marginal significance in the allelic model, which was lost after sensitivity analyses.

The marginal significance of TW1 vs.

We observed only marginal significance in the increase of the distal latency both in healthy volunteers, and in GERD patients.

Only two factors showed a significant association with poor adherence: age and their ability to meet their basic needs in bivariate analysis, with the latter demonstrating marginal significance in multivariate analysis.

The regression model comprised of 9/14 chi-square variables that predicted with one variable demonstrating marginal significance after removing six variables.

Additionally, dietary selenium intake showed consistent results with marginal significance (0.53 (95% CI: 0.35, 0.81); P for trend = 0.002; 0.63 (95% CI: 0.41, 0.96); P for trend = 0.027) after further adjustment for history of hypertension, diabetes, OP in parents, previous fractures (Model 2), and every interested covariate (Model 3).

To the best of my knowledge, present study is the first to use and show that unequal limb movement (hemiparesis) as an independent prognostic factor with marginal significance for unfavourable outcome at 6 months in severe HI.

Overrepresentation of TCAST-like elements was also found near genes that exhibit ATP-binding activity and axon guidance properties but with a marginal significance (0.0183374 and 0.00865139).

A marginal significance in HF hospitalization/cardiac death in the intervention group was observed.

Post hoc analysis showed prevalence of infection by the trypanorhynchs, and with marginal significance of the rhabditid, was higher in shrimp without black gill than those with this condition ( Table 5 ).

However, because of the marginal significance and limitations of the cylinder formula method, this finding should be interpreted with caution. 3.3 Correlation between ultrasound cervical volume measurements The cervical volumes measured using the cylinder formula with 2D ultrasound and the VOCAL software with 3D ultrasound were correlated, as shown in Figure 5 .

Correspondingly, though with a marginal significance, more pressures to take care of a grandchild from adult children reduce the elders’ perception of filial piety receipt.

As shown in Figure 4D , genomic PCR of single cell clones revealed that Cas9-SB and Cas9-N57 increased the insertion efficiency from 24.1 to 36.3% and to 33.8%, respectively, although only marginal significance was observed ( P -values were 0.0495 and 0.1151 for Cas9-SB and Cas9-N57, respectively.

Interestingly, the stratified results revealed that the association was not statistically significant in males and those with higher education, which may potentially explain the marginal significance in the main analysis.

Tumor grade showed marginal significance (II: HR = 3.27 [0.97-10.9], III: HR = 4.59 [1.13-18.7]), while risk classification (HR = 5.56 [2.62-11.8]) had a significant impact on patients from high and low risk groups.

Moreover, we investigated the β‐HB production potential across different age groups in human liver using the Genotype‐Tissue Expression (GTEx) dataset, and revealed a decreasing trend in the expression of these genes during the aging process in humans, with ACAT1 showing marginal significance (Figure S2 ).

Sampling and sample size The Yamane [ 37 ] formula of sample size determination, which reads as follows, was used to calculate the sample size: \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\rm{n}}\,{\rm{ = }}\frac{{\rm{N}}}{{{\rm{1 + }}\,{\rm{N}}{{\left( {\rm{e}} \right)}^{\rm{2}}}}}$$\end{document} Where e is the marginal significance level at 0.05, N is the entire population, and n is the sample size.

There was marginal significance in the knowledge of FP across different categories of marital status and religion as indicated in table 4 .

For CVD, these two methods demonstrate that there is no statistically significant evidence of increased risk of an adverse event with rosiglitazone, while the Mantel–Haenszel method without continuity correction and both Peto methods show marginal significance of a positive effect.

Key findings included: (1) Postoperative inflammation duality where CRP elevation increased risk (β=+0.692; OR = 2.00, 95%CI:1.54–2.58 per 10 mg/L increase), while paradoxical ESR reduction suggested compensatory mechanisms (β=−0.723); (2) Albumin dynamics dominated prediction (ΔAlb β=+0.537) with threshold-dependent effects—minimal risk at < 1.5 units versus exponential rise beyond this threshold; (3) Conventional predictors were displaced—diabetes retained marginal significance (β=+0.088, OR = 1.09) while ASA classification, age, and cardiac history were excluded; (4) Surgical paradoxes included preoperative hemoglobin increasing risk (β=+0.127), tourniquet time linearly accumulating risk (β=+0.101/10-min), and right-sided procedures showing protection (β=−0.056).