“marginally insignificant”

The median tumor size in our study was 48.0 mm (IQR 34.0, 50.0–155.0) and there was a negative correlation between tumor size and ADC values (Rho = −0.25, p = 0.003), as larger tumors were associated with marginally insignificant lower ADC values (≥4 cm = 791.0, <4 cm = 891 ×10−6 mm2/s, p < 0.001).

Although allelic variation of the Madagascar plover among watersheds was only marginally insignificant at α = 0.05, variation among populations within watersheds ( F SC = 0.079, P = 0.002; Table 3 ) and also within populations explained a greater amount of variance in our data ( F ST = 0.104, P < 0.001; Table 3 ).

Whilst both genotype groups showed greater BMI values in urban populations, the non-risk (AA) genotypes showed a highly significant increase BMI value in urban areas (Mean difference = 2.2 kgm −2 (95%CI 0.5–3.9), p < 0.01) whilst the risk genotypes (GG + AG) showed an increase which was marginally insignificant (BMI difference = 0.8 kgm −2 (95%CI − 0.1–1.7), p = 0.08).

Furthermore, a marginally insignificant association was found between prolonged screen time and neck pain (OR=1.13, 95% CI=0.98–1.30, I 2 =60.3%, P value=0.01); however, after sensitivity analysis and removing one study, this association became significant (OR=1.30, 95% CI=1.03–1.64).

The population indices of Scaup and Tufted Duck in the ORE exhibited an increasing trend (β Scaup = 0.026 ± 0.010s.e., p = 0.011; however for Tufted Duck it was marginally insignificant β = 0.008 ± 0.004 s.e., p = 0.058), despite the general decline in their entire northern and western European populations; numbers of both species in the ORE were adversely affected by ice cover in that region (β Scaup = − 0.065 ± 0.011s.e., p < 0.001; β Tufted = 0.032 ± 0.005s.e., p < 0.001) but not by ice cover in the whole Baltic (β Scaup = − 0.099 ± 0.074s.e., p = 0.186; β Tufted = 0.010 ± 0.029s.e., p = 0.735).

The decline in cortical area was also marginally insignificant between groups ( p = 0.013) (Table 3 ).

However, there was a marginally insignificant positive correlation between PPORT and CVD (r = 0.38, P = 0.02, P values were corrected with the Bonferroni method, and a value less than 0.01 was considered statistically significant).

While a marginally insignificant positive correlation with high heterogeneity ( I 2 = 52.50%, P = 0.021) was noted (OR, 1.01; 95%CI 0.58 to 1.43) ( Fig 2 ).

Correlation between geographic distance and genetic differentiation was marginally insignificant for F ST (r = 0.302, P = 0.063) and marginally significant for R ST (r = 0.422, P = 0.032).

The result of two-way ANOVA showed a marginally insignificant effect of gender on the whole MT [ P = 0.04, Table 1 ].

For non‐parents the difference is smaller (4.35% for women and 2.68% for men) and marginally insignificant ( p < 0.050) These percentages are small, with few women directly reporting dissatisfaction with the highly unequal division of household labour.

Brain-PAD and adjusted WMH loads demonstrated a significant and positive correlation in the MCI cohort as well as all cohorts combined ( r = 0.24, P < 0.001), while in other cohorts this association was found to be marginally insignificant ( P > 0.05). 3.7 Association between brain-PAD and microbleed counts Figure 6 illustrates the correlation between brain-PAD and the number of microbleeds across the five participant groups.

One study [ 81 ] reported a marginally insignificant relationship between PCa and high fish intake (p=0.05). 3.

The total effects of the model were marginally insignificant at p = 0.050 ( Table 4 ).

However, the responses for dynamic proximal and momentary distal cues were marginally insignificant (goodness-of-fit χ 2 test: χ 2 = 3.739, df = 1, p = 0.05).

Utilizing a random-effects model, the overall differences between the markers were marginally insignificant ( p = 0.05).

The three way interaction between job type, sex of face and image type was marginally insignificant (F(1, 118) = 3.91, p = 0.05, η p 2 = .03), which is not surprising given the reduced power of three-way interaction effects [ 29 ].

Marginally insignificant associations ( p = 0.05–0.10) were also found with celery ( p = 0.062), and green or herbal tea ( p = 0.071).

Marginally insignificant, adolescents from the intervention group needed less time for speed shuttle run (intervention effect = −0.8 s, 95% CI −1.58-0.07; P = 0.05).

Other exercise intensity variables were not different or had marginally insignificant differences between Case and Controls groups (0.10 ≤ p < 0.05; Table S‐A2 ). 3.4.

Among the remaining variables, RBP concentration and history of deworming in the last 6 months showed marginally insignificant associations with hemoglobin (.1 > p > .05); whereas serum zinc level, child anthropometric indicators, breastfeeding status, dietary diversity, recent history of diarrhea, and G6PD deficiency were not associated with hemoglobin.

RN neurons exhibited a unimodal distribution that was marginally insignificant (unimodal Rayleigh test, p = 0.06, r = 0.31, PTD = 288°), whereas the bimodal distribution was marginally significant (Figure 6A ; bimodal Rayleigh test, p < 0.05, r = 0.33, PTD axes = 123–303°).

Vaccination with RCN-SS-TD-MoG was marginally insignificant compared to controls ( p = 0.0503).

The random intercept for School was found to be marginally insignificant (21.439, p = 0.051, Wald Z = 1.953), and the AR diagonal (233.255, p<0.001, Wald Z = 19.467) and the AR ρ (.125, p = 0.01, Wald Z = 2.574) of the error term were found to be significant.

The results of the present study confirmed that the addition of fentanyl to low-dose bupivacaine increased the success rate (stone-free rate) of TUL as complete stone-free status was achieved in 100% of the patients in group B, which was marginally insignificant (p=0.051).