“marginally significant”

There was a marginally significant difference, however, between [ 18 F]-FTP uptake isolated to the entorhinal cortex among players in age-, position-, and race-adjusted models ( p = 0.05) that may represent an area of future investigation.

The interaction term was marginally significant t (1) = 1.94, p = .05, suggesting the difference in abstraction between cohorts is greater at higher levels of the intercept, although this effect was not predicted and should be interpreted accordingly.

3B , in the regions activated during Middle minus End trials, the contrast M-S minus M-L did not reveal significant signal difference in the parahippocampal region (PHC), but revealed marginally significant signal increase in the left lateral parietal region (IPL1) (t(71) = 2.6, P <0.05).

There is a marginally significant objective RR (20.1% in combination group vs. 13.7% in the control group; odds ratio, 1.61 [95% CI, 1.00–2.62]; P = 0.05).

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

P3 The main effect of group was marginally significant [ F (1, 50) = 4.03, p = 0.050, η p 2 = 0.075]; the HTA group had a larger P3 (2.88 ± 0.18 μV) compared with LTA group (2.39 ± 0.18 μV; Figure 4 ).

A 2 (test) × 3 (group) mixed-factors ANOVA revealed no main effect of group, F (2,71) = 0.16; p = 0.85; η 2 G < 0.01, no main effect of test, F (1,71) = 1.10; p = 0.30; η 2 G < 0.01, but a marginally significant group × test interaction, F (2,71) = 3.07; p = 0.05; η 2 G = 0.02.

Specifically, C2 had a marginally significant difference from C3 ( p < 0.05), and C2 scored lower than C3 in this dimension.

The evaluation of the product was positively correlated with the health orientation, r (661) = 0.29, p < 0.001, the ecology orientation, r (661) = 0.17, p < 0.001, and the self-perceived knowledge of healthy eating; however, this relation was marginally significant, r (632) = 0.08, p = 0.05.

The differences when splitting by length of stay were not statistically significant, but there was a marginally significant interaction between gender and length of stay among non-western immigrants (p = 0.05) with respect to psychological distress.

A marginally significant inverse relationship was also noted between fasting glucose and total BAT activity (r = −0.40, p = 0.05).

1 ; the infected brother showed more attrition compared to sham in 9 out of 11 pair-wise comparisons) and infected females also showed a marginally significant difference from controls (Z = −1.75, N = 10, P = 0.05; Fig. 1 ; the infected sister showed more attrition than sham in 4 out of 5 pair-wise comparisons).

A marginally significant difference was also noted in the mothers’ nationality, with the majority of foreign mothers being in the low PB group (83.3%, Fisher's Exact Test, P = .05).

Females were slightly older than males, with a mean age of 43.53 ± 3.01 years compared to 36.63 ± 12.80 years for males, a marginally significant difference ( p = 0.05); regarding ethnicity, the sample was predominantly Caucasian, with no statistically significant difference between the two sexes ( p = 0.323).

The difference remained significant in patients receiving twice‐daily TRT (Figure 1 B: 15.57 vs 9.23 months P = .003), while marginally significant in those receiving once‐daily TRT (Figure 1 C: 12.13 vs 8.53, P = .050).

The difference in EFS was marginally significant ( P = 0.05, 95% CI 0.15–0.99) but there was no difference in OS ( P = 0.2, 95% CI 0.12–1.41).

In the subsequent results and discussion, we use “marginally significant” when p < 0.05 and “significant” to describe results where p < 0.01.

The gap in body dissemination frequency between immunocompetent combined with mildly immunocompromised (5.26%, 3/57) and severe immunocompromised (19.0%, 8/42) was marginally significant ( P = .05).

Post-hoc analyses showed significantly higher adhesion score in the CON group than that in the CH group ( P = 0.03) and difference between the CON group and the SHG group was marginally significant ( P = 0.05).

In the model including all men regardless of diabetes status, the association between testosterone and AMI was marginally significant in the age-adjusted analysis (HR = 0.950 95%CI 0.90–1.00, p = 0.050).

Health in medical care (Panel E) exhibits marginally significant positive impact (PcPatap: β = 1.349, p < 0.05, PcPatau: β = 0.810, p < 0.10), implying that healthcare infrastructure and accessibility are fundamental to urban innovation.

However, we did find a significant relationship between language ability and Body Self-Esteem (B = .13, 95%CI(.04,.22), p < .005, h 2 = .04) and a marginally significant relationship with the “Self” Self-Esteem, (B = .16, 95%CI(.04,.28), p < .05, h 2 = .04).

As for cheating on exams, Model 3 showed a marginally significant negative association for extraversion ( b = –0.18, SE = 0.11, t = –1.97, p < .05), indicating that higher extraversion tended to decrease the probability of cheating.

Besides, the association between stress and flow experience was marginally significant (β = –0.16, p = 0.05), showing that H4 was basically supported.

The results showed that the three-way interaction effect was no longer significant after inhibition was controlled as a covariate ( F (4, 104) = 2.17, p = 0.078, and η p 2 = 0.077), and was marginally significant after working memory was controlled ( F (4, 114) = 2.46, p = 0.05, and η p 2 = 0.079).