Barely Significant
← all phrases

“marginally significant”

26,083 sentences · 26,083 papers · 36,483 search hits before verification · confirmed specimen

Sighted at

p>=0.1

Listed by Hankins (2013) · Otte et al. (2022)

In the literature

marginally significantp = 0.051.0× alphagold
Changes in Depressive Symptoms The ANOVA testing for changes in depressive symptoms demonstrated a marginally significant main effect of time-by-group interaction (F(1, 79) = 3.82, p = 0.05, η 2 = 0.05), indicating a marginally significant difference between the groups post-intervention.
marginally significantp = 0.051.0× alphagold
For the subsample who also used drugs, there was a marginally significant treatment‐by‐time interaction ( F (2,31) = 3.28, p = 0.05); Khanya had a greater reduction in the number of drinks at six months compared to ETAU (see Figure S2 ).
marginally significantp = .051.0× alphagold
Second, in the item “Besides mosquitoes, can people also spread dengue fever?” ( Fig 2B ), at T1 the direct instruction group showed statistically significant differences concerning the workshop group ( β = −1.70, p < .001), the abbreviated workshop group also showed differences but marginally significant ( β = −0.87, p = .05).
marginally significantP =0.051.0× alphagold
A meta-analysis ( Clark et al , 2005 ) showed a significant reduction in the length of hospitalisation (hazard ratio: 0.63, 95% CI: 0.49–0.82, P =0.0006) with the use of G-CSF, but only a marginally significant decrease in infection-related mortality (odds ratio: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.26–1.00, P =0.05) and no significant reduction in overall mortality.
marginally significantP = .051.0× alphagold
For patients with late prophylactic cranial irradiation, the rates of brain metastasis tended to be higher in the TDRT group but marginally significant (HR, 1.81; 95% CI, 0.99-3.31; P = .05), and the rates of brain metastasis were not significantly different among those who received early prophylactic cranial irradiation (HR, 1.39; 95% CI, 0.49-3.99; P = .54).
marginally significantp = 0.051.0× alphagold
Reducing Visual Information Increased Pointing Error For both younger and older adults, pointing error increased as we removed visual information, going from full, to partial, to blindfolded conditions ( Figure 8 B), although this increase was marginally significant (i.e., there was a weak effect of visual information when considering both the fake and real hand conditions together, p = 0.05).
marginally significantp=0.0501.0× alphagold
Overall, the patterns replicated those observed for the Group effect: the Previous trial ×Partner’s choice ×Age interaction was significant in GLMM sup 1 ( b =0.02, 95% CI = [0.001, 0.036], p =0.038, see Appendix 1—table 5 ) and LMM sup 3 ( b =0.04, 95% CI = [0.031, 0.046], p<0.001, see Appendix 1—table 8 ), and marginally significant in LMM sup 1 ( b =0.0012, 95% CI = [ − 1.63 × 10 − 7 , 0.002], p=0.050, see Appendix 1—table 6 ).