“marginal significance”

Among the 21 tested SNPs, 16 showed the same direction of allelic effects in our samples compared with previous studies; 6 SNPs achieved nominal significance ( p < 0.05) at one-tailed test, and 2 additional SNPs showed marginal significance ( p < 0.10).

The three-way interaction of AI complexity, intangibility, and reliability was found to reach marginal significance [Pillai’s trace=0.074, F (24, 1,359)=1.43, p <0.10, with an effect size of ηp 2 =0.025], implying that approximately 2.5% of the variance of the dependent variable is associated with the interaction of the three factors.

Marginal significance was considered when 0.05 < p < 0.1 [ 63 ].

Due to the small sample, marginal significance (0.05 < P < 0.10) is also reported.

While this marginal significance (p-value < 0.1) might be due to the reduced statistical power of two sample tests in small samples, our finding suggests that despite skull architecture being an important factor in the loss of sutures during both pathological and normal development, there are non-topological factors that further discriminate between normal and pathological loss of sutures.

A MANOVA revealed significant relationships among school, gender, and learning styles ( p < 0.01), while personality traits showed marginal significance ( p < 0.10).

Variables with marginal significance (p<0.10) in univariate analyses were entered into multivariable regression models as covariates, adjusting for children’s age, household registration, number of children, father’s age, father’s education, father’s occupation, mother’s age, mother’s education, mother’s occupation, primary caregiver, monthly household income, family structure and frequency of parenting and care activities.

36 Three out of four models found evidence of an interaction between attitude and exposure to the Pope's message, such that those who had more exposure to the Pope's message had a stronger relationship between their climate change attitude and activism behaviors (RQ1; willingness to join a campaign, b attitudeXexposure = 0.06, p < 0.05, rewarding companies, b attitudeXexposure = 0.24, p < 0.05, and, at marginal significance, punishing companies b attitudeXexposure = 0.25, p < 0.10, see Table 1 and Figure 1 ).

In the multivariable Poisson model, the variables that showed association in the univariate analysis were included, even those that showed marginal significance ( p < 0.10).

Entered factors were those with at least marginal significance ( P < 0.1) with a univariate analysis.

The analyses also revealed some enriched terms with marginal significance, involved in biological adhesion, pattern specification, embryonic morphogenesis, appendage development and limb development ( P <0.1).

Model 1 adjusted for age and sex, Model 2 adjusted for all variables except baseline ASPECTS with at least marginal significance ( P < .1) on univariate analysis, and Model 3 adjusted for all variables with at least marginal significance ( P < .1) on univariate analysis.

Predictors achieving marginal significance (p value < 0.10) were entered in a multivariable logistic regression model.

For the atherogenic index of plasma (AIP), linear regression analysis revealed a non-significant trend (HR = 0.90, 95%CI: 0.78–1.05, P = 0.170), although participants in the highest AIP quartile approached marginal significance (HR = 0.89, 95%CI = 0.78–1.02, P = 0.100) ( Supplementary Table 3 ).

2 , with * indicating a p value < 0.05 and ¶ indicating marginal significance (0.05 ≤ p < 0.1) for comparisons of the no-DR, NPDR, and PDR groups with the control group.

Five other variables reached marginal significance (p < 0.1).

The covariates applied and additional percent variance described by each were: RNA integrity, RIN (6.7%); race (6.9%); pH (5.1%); smoking status (2.2%); age at death (4.4%); and sex (1.4%). Correction for transcript measurements collected in two data sets was also applied (6.9% variance), as well as a conservative correction for postmortem interval, which revealed marginal significance ( p = 0.10) within samples from the BP group alone.

Variables showing marginal significance (p<0.10) in univariate analysis were included in the multivariate model to avoid premature exclusion of potentially important covariates, as recommended for prognostic studies ( 27 – 29 ).

Five genes showed marginal significance (0.05 < p < 0.1, Figure 7B ): LRP1 ( p = 0.0556), SZT2 ( p = 0.0638), FAT3 ( p = 0.0654), RB1 ( p = 0.0866) and DNAH9 ( p = 0.0906).

In contrast, ST307 has an average Jaccard distance of 0.11, and in the opposite limit, ST326 showed the lowest intra-ST diversity, with an average Jaccard distance of approximately 0.02 and marginal significance ( P < 0.1), indicating greater homogeneity in the polysaccharide gene profiles.

However, if we also consider the marginal significance ( p = 0.10), the RMSSD, variable extracted from the ECG signal, was seen to be different between the two groups ( p = 0.06), with the emotions judged as positive eliciting higher values for RMSSD than negative counterparts.

For all testing, significance was defined as p ≤ 0.05 and marginal significance as p < 0.1.

( 2015 ) criterion for “marginal significance” ( P < 0.10).

Exact two-sided p-values are reported; * indicates statistical significance ( p < 0.05) and × indicates marginal significance (0.05 ≤ p < 0.10).

Marginal significance values (p < 0.10) show that among Hispanics, there may be a higher intake of vegetables and lower intake of sweets among the low total daily caloric intake group.