“marginally significant”

after 1996), patients with B-symptoms had marginally significant lower EFS (p = 0.05).

For self-compassion, the variance of the slope (0.15, p = .08) was marginally significant based on the conventional two-sided criterion ( p < .05).

The effect of threshold on the SME was marginally significant ( F(2,48) = 3.19, p = 0.05; η 2 p = 0.12; η 2 G = 0.01 ).

While estimates calculated using this correction factor did not appreciably differ from uncorrected estimates, the HR for obese class 1 went from being marginally significant at the p < 0.05 threshold to being no longer significant at that threshold.

For the N290 component, an exploratory 2 (condition: helping, hindering) × 2 (hemisphere: left, right) × 2 (age group: 6-month, 12-month) mixed ANOVA found a significant main effect of age group, F (1, 71)= 7.17, p = .009, η 2 = .09, and a marginally significant main effect of condition, F (1, 71)= 3.99, p = .050, η 2 = .05 (see Fig. 5 ).

A chi-square test showed a marginally significant association, χ 2 (3) = 7.8, p = .05.

ANOVA showed that this factor, the derived eABR type, was marginally significant F(2, 14) = 3.62; p = 0.05.

After including the covariates along the main predictor, food and nutrition literacy remained significant ( B = 0.13, 95% CI: 0.001–0.32, β = 0.11; p < 0.05) while food label reading were marginally significant ( B = 0.17, 95% CI: 0.01–0.22, β = 0.11; p = 0.05).

Results were considered significant at P ≤ 0.05 and marginally significant between P > 0.05 and P ≤ 0.10.

In the validation group, only the difference in smoking history between patients with wild-type EGFR and patients with EGFR mutation was statistically significant ( P = 0.008) while sex showed a marginally significant difference between the two groups ( P = 0.05) ( Table 3 ). 3.2.

The movement × condition interaction was not significant for control pictures ( F (1, 58) = .72, p = .40), but it was marginally significant for alcohol pictures ( F (1,58) = 3.92 p = .05).

The amount of lignin, relative to the initial values, between high management intensity (BA or SA) forests and low management intensity (BU and BS) forests was marginally significant at 180 DAI and 284 DAI (Klason lignin, P = 0.0500 and 0.0518) and at 180, 284 and 362 DAI (total lignin, P = 0.0558, 0.0541 and 0.0923, respectively; data not shown).

In Americans, the unadjusted positive stress-suppression association ( r = 0.07 [−0.01, 0.16], p = .09) remained marginally significant after adjustment ( r = 0.09 [−0.25, −0.05], p = .05).

The analysis showed marginally significant statistical differences between AC and AP (OR 1.56, 95% CI 1.00–2.42, p = 0.05), and the results were homogenous ( p = 0.49; I 2 = 0%) (Fig. 7 b).

Besides sex and occupation, educational attainment also showed a marginally significant association ( OR = 0.63, p =.05).

Of note, the difference between moral vegetarians and omnivores in stress was marginally significant, p = .05.

Among the five dimensions measured, Perceived Safety showed a marginally significant trend ( F ( 2 , 145 ) = 3.06 , p = 0.050 , η 2 = 0.041 ).

ngagement Strategies pathway (β = 0.224, p < 0.001); Hypothesis H5 demonstrated robust support, revealing the strongest direct effect where Psychological Resilience significantly enhanced Cognitive Engagement Strategies (β = 0.366, p < 0.001); Finally, Hypothesis H6 was partially supported, showing marginally significant positive influence of Psychological Resilience on Academic Motivation (β = 0.149, p < 0.05).

We also found marginally significant enrichments of phosphorylation sites ( P < 0.05), methylation sites ( P < 0.05), and sumoylation sites ( P < 0.01) in these proteins (Additional file 1 : Table S3).

We retained DERs that were at least marginally significant (p < 0.05) in this replication dataset, yielding 50,560 (80.1%) genome-wide significant DERs that were also differentially expressed in this independent DLPFC dataset, which were used for the analyses described below.

In univariate analysis, male sex, poorly differentiated histology, macroscopic vascular invasion, tumour size, anatomic resection, serum ALT>30 units l −1 , serum AFP>20 ng ml −1 and HAI were associated with poor recurrence-free survival, and Ishak stage 6 compared with Ishak stage 1–5 had a marginally significant impact on recurrence-free survival ( Table 2 , Figure 2C , P =0.05).

At the allelic level, a marginally significant difference was observed in the frequency of 5 and 6 alleles among HADS-A subgroups ( p = 0.05).

There was a marginally significant interaction between group and hemisphere ( F (2,24) = 3.07, p = .05).

Temperature had minimal impact on gut microbial functions at the gene level (KO) but became marginally significant at the pathway level (KEGG class level 3 and 2) (0.01 < p < 0.05, Figure 5c ).

The difference in early-life fecundity was marginally significant ( F 1,37 = 3.98; p = 0.05).