“marginally non-significant”

ANVOAs with factors of Category (High, Low or Guess/Baseline), Hemisphere (Left/Right) and Site (Inferior/Middle/Superior) comparing each response category to Baseline revealed a marginally non-significant main effect of Category for High accuracy responses ( F (1,20) = 3.373, p = 0.07, η p 2 = 0.15), a significant interaction between Category and Site ( F (1.22,24.45) = 8.87, p < 0.001, η p 2 = 0.31) and marginally non-significant Category, Hemisphere and Site ( F (1.23,24.49) = 3.50, p = 0.07, η p 2 = 0.15) interaction.

PCL-5 scores were significantly higher in the SHI group but differences became marginally non-significant (p = 0.070) when scores were converted using criteria for PTSD diagnosis, although the magnitude of difference in proportions was large ( Table 2 ).

In particular, the correlation between FID and RET was strongly negative in smaller (slope: −0.910; estimate ± s.e.: –0.980 ± 0.300; p < 0.001), absent in average-sized (slope: 0.131; estimate ± s.e.: –0.180 ± 0.160; p = 0.260), and had a marginally non-significant positive trend in larger gobies (slope: 1.170; estimate ± s.e.: 0.620 ± 0.340; p = 0.070; figure 2 ).

80.9%, 95%CI 63.3-98.6, respectively), although the difference was marginally non-significant (P=0.07; OR 3.48, 95%CI 0.89-13.62; I 2 =5%).

Although the effect was marginally non-significant (SMD = −0.33, P = 0.07), it was rated as moderate-quality evidence ( Table 3 ).

cancellata (p = 0.867), and a marginally non-significant trend was found for T. decipiens (p = 0.0709) ( Fig. 4 ). 3.5.

Multiple linear regression revealed diabetes mellitus as a significant negative predictor of RMP-VFI ( β = −24.6, 95% CI: −44.47, −4.75; p = 0.017), with spared V5 showing a positive but marginally non-significant association ( β = 17.5, 95% CI: −1.61, 36.66; p = 0.071).

patients was only marginally non-significant (χ 2 = 3.264, df = 1, P = 0.071).

The same observation applied for HIV DNA level with the higher level being associated with marginally non-significant faster CD4 increases after the 3rd month of cART (difference between those with HIV DNA above vs. below median 1.2 cells/μL/month; 95% CI: −0.1, 2.6; p = 0.071) ( Supplementary Table S2 and Supplementary Figure S3 ).

While this difference between the coding and non-coding regions is marginally non-significant based on a Fisher's exact test ( P = 0.071), a phylogeny-based resampling test showed that coding-region tree lengths always were considerably greater than any of the tree lengths derived from non-coding regions, under both MP and maximum likelihood (ML) criteria (thus, substitution rates in coding regions exceed those in non-coding regions at P <0.001).

Placebo) were observed at Weeks 26 (P = 0.016) and 52 (P = 0.041), as well as marginally non-significant differences at Weeks 13 (P = 0.071) and 39 (P = 0.064).

There was a marginally non-significant overall difference between ethnic groups (P = 0.071), and none of the multiple comparisons achieved significance (P > 0.05).

10%) but the difference was marginally non-significant (OR = 2.30, 95%CI: 0.91-5.81, p = 0.071).

For social loneliness, the interaction was marginally non-significant (F(4, 3975) = 2.16, p = .071), but post hoc comparisons revealed a clear gradient: All pairwise limitation comparisons were significant in the middle-aged group ( p s < 0.007), two of three were significant in the 66–79 group, and none reached significance in the 80 + group.

Mortality in esfenvalerate-treated dishes averaged greater than 90% and mortality in pyrethrins-treated dishes averaged 60%, but this difference was marginally non-significant ( P = 0.071).

The latter interaction was due to two marginally non-significant ( P = 0.071–0.072) effects: a decrease in the probability of zygodactyly for small object sizes relative to large when grasping fish compared to the “other substrate” reference condition of perching, and an increase in the probability of zygodactyly for medium object sizes relative to large, when perched in trees compared to “other substrates.” However, because these parameters were not significant, we felt justified in excluding the object size × contact condition within grasping scenario interaction effect in subsequent analyses (below).

A marginally non-significant result was seen between FS levels and student status ( p = 0.071), with only seniors showing a statistically significant coefficient ( p = 0.023).

Furthermore, the marginally non-significant main effect for group ( P = 0.071) supports a trend for a moderately better sleep quality in the judo group (good sleep) compared with ball games (altered sleep) across the whole study period, but with a relatively low effect size.

Female genotype was marginally non-significant (Dev 2, 176 = 2.26, P = 0.071), with a trend for w 1118 females to fight for less time than Canton-S or Dahomey females.

(d) Population growth Differences in rates of intrinsic increase between Daphnia from invaded and uninvaded lakes from the common garden data were marginally non-significant ( F 1,8 = 4.36, p = 0.071); Daphnia from invaded lakes exhibited an r that was 10% greater than Daphnia from uninvaded lakes ( figure 3 ).

Time of use retained a negative association with self-esteem but was marginally non-significant ( p = 0.071), while age and gender did not emerge as statistically significant predictors.

In particular, while parasite density displayed a marginally non-significant increase with age in patients harboring the triple infection K1 + MAD20 + RO33 (P = 0.072), density decreased with age in patients infected with all other combinations.

The incidence of complications was higher in the B group (50%), compared to the other ABO (31.2%) with a marginally non-significant difference ( p = 0.072).

Finally, mean intake of the six antioxidant micronutrients, from which the DAI was calculated, did not vary between groups; however, mean intakes for vitamin A and vitamin C were only marginally non-significant ( p = 0.072 and p = 0.069, respectively).

2 ), although the difference between the old urban population (Warszawa) and one of the rural populations (Żeromin) was only marginally non-significant (lower heterozygosity in Warszawa; β = −0.070 ± 0.039, P = 0.072, Table 1 ).