“marginal significance”

Findings with marginal significance (0.05 > p > 0.01) should be interpreted with caution, as these results may reflect trends rather than conclusive evidence.

Even though the results suggested a worse prognosis among CIMP-H CRC patients with marginal significance ( P < 0.01), the sample sizes of the major studies included in this review were relatively small.

To identify cancer-specific regulatory variants, we compared our eQTLs to eQTLs from the Genotype-Tissue Expression (GTEx) project 10 , adopting previous strategies to assess eQTL replication 11 , and probed lead eQTL variants for marginal significance in GTEx tissues ( P ≤ 0.01, Bonferroni-adjusted).

Marginal significance was observed in PRAD (p-value = 0.01) and HNSC (p-value = 0.04), while highly statistical significance was detected in COADREAD, LUAD and LUSC (p-value = 3.82e-13, 1e-15 and 4.04e-16 respectively) (Figure 1 ).

We then took module scores with marginal significance (i.e., with unadjusted p- values < 0.01) as predictors to construct models, and repeated our main analysis.

Such differences were also found between the uppermost SSS and the superficial veins, indicating that the latter is upstream to the former in both the young and elderly groups (0.9 s at P = 0.002 in young; and 1.0 s at a marginal significance of P = 0.01 in the elderly).

Interpretation thresholds followed standard normal distribution critical values: ±1.96 ( p > 0.05) = Nonsignificant deviation; ±1.96 to ± 2.58 (0.01 < p < 0.05) = Marginal significance and ±2.58 to ± 3.29 (0.001 < p < 0.01): Strong evidence against independence.

The thresholds for statistical significance were set as follows: p < 0.05 indicating marginal significance, p < 0.01 indicating moderate significance, and p < 0.001 indicating strong significance.

Subsequently, comparisons across the groups were scrutinized using Student’s t-tests, with the significance levels clearly demarcated as *P < 0.05, indicating marginal significance; **P < 0.01, denoting moderate significance; and ***P < 0.001, representing high significance.

miR-31-5p also showed 3.0-fold increase in CK5/6 + cases with marginal significance( p = 0.01).

Differences were deemed statistically significant based on stringent criteria, specifically, * P < 0.05 for marginal significance, ** P < 0.01 for moderate significance, *** P < 0.001 for strong significance, and **** P < 0.0001 for highly significant differences, or as not significant.

Although most variants showed no significant association with thyroid, liver, or cardiac involvement, two genes—LY96 and PTPN22—reached marginal significance for thyroid, hepatic, and cardiac pathologies ( p = 0.01).

Although we found marginal significance between two SNPs, rs7013278 and rs7014346 (HR = 2.20, P = 0.01 and HR = 1.96, P = 0.03 respectively), with inferior CRC survival by multivariate regression analysis, none of these variants showed study-wide association with survival after correction for multiple testing.

The Shapiro-Wilk test could not rule out a normal distribution for the CSPs of W42Q ( p = 0.13 ) and indicated only marginal significance for WT ( p = 0.011 ).

The blood eosinophil counts and serum ECP concentrations were also different between the three groups, with marginal significance ( P =0.011 and P =0.093, respectively).

For miRNA-ratio correlation, however, marginal significance was only observed for genes with at least one 8mer site in their ORFs ( p = 0.012, one sided KS-test, Fig. 3 B ).

Conversely, pSD was more frequent in the > 60 years group, with this difference reaching statistical significance in males and a marginal significance in females ( P = 0.0138 and P = 0.053) (Table 4 ).

Although the latency difference between stimulation and non-stimulation trials reached marginal significance at the population level ( n = 56 sites, z = -2.45, p = 0.014; two-tailed Wilcoxon signed-rank test), the difference was small, and only one of the 56 stimulation sites showed a significant effect ( p < 0.05; two-tailed Wilcoxon rank-sum test).

After analyzed, the marginal significance was discovered in European subgroup ( P = 0.015), which was negative result in another meta-analysis study [ 37 ].

Lower tNAA concentrations were associated with greater mood/cognition symptom improvement at marginal significance ( B = −0.62, SE = 0.25, X 2 = 5.89, p = 0.015).

We also observed a marginal significance, still in favor of AROS, in the frequency of strongly agree evaluations ( z = −2.3, p = 0.015).

Nitrotyrosine, a marker of oxidative and nitrosative stress, decreased with increasing ozone concentrations, with marginal significance (120 vs 0 ppb: -41.5, CI -70.1, -12.8; 70 vs 0 ppb: -14.2, CI -42.7, 14.2; p = 0.017).

A lack of an association between each SNP and MIH was found in analyses performed for frequency distributions of major homozygotes, heterozygotes, and minor homozygotes (except for the rs4811117 polymorphism, for which the p -value reached marginal significance at p = 0.017, which is on the borderline if the Bonferroni-corrected significance level of p = 0.05/3 = 0.017 is used for the global chi-squared test with the further tests treated as post-hoc tests).

At R2, we found an interaction effect between Condition and Flanker , and post-hoc analyses (α = 0.0125) uncovered marginal significance in the verb-final condition (β = –0.012, SE = 0.005, t = –2.455, p = 0.018) and insignificance in the verb-initial condition.

The within-ROI analysis showed main effects of hemisphere in the pre-SMA [ F (1,10) = 11.2, P < 0.01] and reaching marginal significance in the pre-SEF [ F (1,10) = 8.07, P = 0.018].