“marginal significance”

3a ) and expression-correlating aDMRs with marginal significance but high odds ratio (OR = 3.15, p = 0.05) (Fig. 3b ).

The only exception was the Fish Face (FF) which showed only marginal significance between ID and AD communication during this situation (p = 0.05, for details see Table S1 a, Fig. 2 ).

In the HBOT group, PPT increased in 70.8 ± 90.6 kPa, compared to increase of 20.1 ± 85.7 kPa in the MED group, group-by-time interaction demonstrated marginal significance with medium effect size (d = 0.57, p = 0.05).

Results Median serum IL‐6 was approximately twice as high in dogs with high fibrosis scores (15.5 pg/mL; range, 1.4 to 235 pg/mL) compared to dogs with low fibrosis scores (7.6 pg/mL; range, 1.4 to 148.1 pg/mL), with marginal significance ( P = .05).

In Phase 2, normality tests were significant for external validation measures but not significant for the full WONE Index or Stress Subscale, with the Resilience Subscale showing marginal significance ( P =.05).

Even when using the second, more stringent a priori threshold of 23 RCs—the common maximum number of repeats reported in controls—marginal significance was obtained (ratio patients:controls 4:0; one/two-tailed p = 0.05).

Notably, we discerned three protein-MS pairs reaching marginal significance levels from the deCODE (P < 0.05 for two-sample MR analysis).

Direct association of FOXP3 + TILs with VSA t2 was noted (marginal significance p = 0.05; Fig. 4 e).

However, NK cells consistently showed marginal significance (defined as nominal p < 0.05) for heritability enrichment in cell-type-specific open chromatin regions across two independent GWAS and in the cell-type-specific expression analysis where NK cells were compared with T cell subsets using a curated list of genome-wide significant loci for AS.

11.5%, p =0.41), and marginal significance comparing the LCI group and LCI+AI group in patients aged <50 years (40.0% vs. 16.7%, p =0.05).

In this study, the previously meaningful parameter (the IPV 14 ratio) used during SE with balloon distension showed a marginal significance between the BFT responders and non-responders ( P = 0.050) ( Table 3 ).

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 ).

4 b, we inferred a list of 16 candidate master regulator (“MR”) TFs: ATF3, CEBPB, CEBPD, EHF, ELK3, FOSL2, FOXO3, HOXA7, IRF4, IRF8, JARID2, RARG, TCF7L2, THRB, ZEB2 and ZNF217 that either: (a) are significantly differentially expressed between bulk cDC1 and cDC2 (BH p.adj < 0.05, absolute value of log2 fold change > 1, Additional file 2 : Table S5); or (b) regulate the differentially expressed genes and exhibit differential expression between bulk cDC1 and cDC2 with marginal significance ( p -value < 0.05, absolute value of log2 fold change > 1, Additional file 2 : Table S5).

Importantly, regression from possible sarcopenia was consistently associated with improved global cognitive function across all subgroups, with significant results (all P <.05) except among urban residents, where the association reached marginal significance ( P =.05).

Marginal significance was set at P < 0.05.

The correlation of the auxiliary variables with the solid phase gives similar results; the only correlation that we found with marginal significance ( p = 0.05) was in the case of insemination ( r = 0.47).

Contrast II The TANOVA group main effect was significant ( p = 0.04); differences in topography reached marginal significance in the case of microstate D ( p = 0.05), while they were non-significant for microstates A ( p = 0.50), B ( p = 0.08), and C ( p = 1.0).

12.2 ± 6.7 points, p = 0.04), and higher scores of anxiety symptoms with a marginal significance level (8.5 ± 4.4 vs. 6.2 ± 3.6 points, p = 0.05), according to HADS ( Table 1 ).

Perceived difficulty of use also showed change over time, reaching significance between DP2 and DP3 ( t 8 =–4.29, P =.01) and marginal significance between DP1 and DP3 ( t 8 =–2.31, P =.05).

In the motivated effort model, only the group effect that had already being observed across all load conditions achieved marginal significance ( b = -3.02, t = -1.97, p = 0.05, n = 54), but no effect of maximum digit span ( b = -0.48, t = -0.90, p = 0.37, n = 54) or motivated effort ( b = 0.04, t = 0.20, p = 0.84, n = 54) was found.

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.

In addition, marginal significance was observed for poor overall survival in patients with frontal lesions (Log rank test: p = 0.050) ( Table 6 ).

The Opiate drug category was the only non-marijuana drug type to reach marginal significance: left anterior insula–cerebellum ( p < 0.05 uncorrected).

Native and invaded range phyllosphere samples differed with marginal significance ( P = 0.05).

When comparing outcomes by IMS regimens, there were no significant differences in preterm births ( p = 0.60) between groups; however, marginal significance was observed for live births ( p = 0.05) ( Table S1B and Fig.