“marginally significant”

In the case of results on the Commentary Test and Emotional Prosody Test, group differences were at the level of marginally significant ( p < 0.01).

Among high-quality IS specimens, there were no statistically significant differences in organism density in the IS specimens from cases with radiographic pneumonia compared with nonpneumonia cases, with the exception of a marginally significant difference for cytomegalovirus (median Ct, 27.9 vs 28.5; P = .01) ( Figure 2 ).

Although the finding was marginally significant at the p < .01 level ( p = .0102), Hispanics with an immediate family member with cancer had higher odds of having been diagnosed with cancer.

In the native speakers’ error rates, there was a cue effect in the predicted direction for long words that was marginally significant in the item analysis, t 1 (19) = 3.34, p < 0.01; t 2 (20) = 1.73, p = 0.09, whereas it went into the opposite direction for short words, t 1 (19) = –3.21, p < 0.01; t 2 (20) = –2.51, p < 0.05.

Furthermore, the result of Egger’s test also revealed a marginally significant publication bias (p < 0.01) (Table 4 ).

To control for the differences in baseline caregiver characteristics between the two groups, we also ran each model with the baseline variables that were significant or marginally significant ( p < .01) and compared the results.

Significant results ( p < 0.006, i.e., after Bonferroni correction) and tendencies or marginally significant results ( p < 0.01, i.e., after Bonferroni correction) are reported herein.

We found a distinct and marginally significant difference in the distribution patterns of these genotypes between the cancer and non-cancer groups ( p = 0.01).

The impact on outpatient services revenue was marginally significant ( P =.01) and negative, suggesting that adoption led to at least a temporary drop in revenue, on average, in comparison with the control group.

Crucially, there was a marginally significant correlation between the mean RTs on the digit-number word matching task and the standardized arithmetic test scores, r p (48) = −.36, p = .010.

By post Hoc parametric test study, glibenclamide 5 mg/kg and fustin 100 mg/kg showed a favorable important (P < 0.001) drop in blood glucose after thirty days of therapy, while fustin 50 mg/kg was found to be marginally significant (P < 0.01) as opposed to a diabetic control group (P < 0.001). 3.3.

However, InFlu B also produced a marginally significant signal ( p < 0.01), indicating partial cross-reactivity and thus reduced specificity for the SARS-CoV-2 N protein.

A p value <0.05 was considered marginally significant, and a p value <0.01 was considered significant.

The following thresholds were used for interpreting p -values: p ≤ 0.001 indicates very highly significant results (strong evidence); 0.001 < p ≤ 0.01, highly significant; 0.01 < p ≤ 0.05, significant at the 95% confidence level; 0.05 < p ≤ 0.1, marginally significant (trend); and p > 0.1, not significant.

Adjusted for gender and ACD respectively ODD, preschool behaviors explained 2.7% of the variance in ODD problems and 1.2% of the variance in ACD problems. Individual difficult behaviors Hot temper, disobedience, and bossiness were all significant predictors of ODD problems ( B s between 0.12 and 0.14, p s < .001), while the association with bullying was marginally significant ( B = 0.05, p = .01).

Initial analyses revealed no significant differences in demographic or EEG characteristics between the post-stroke non-cognitive impairment (PSN) group and healthy controls (HC), with the exception of marginally significant variations in A-MMD ( p = 0.01) and B-MMD ( p = 0.03) ( Supplementary material 1 ).

Additionally, a marginally significant weak negative correlation was found between the ASDR and SDI ( R = -0.09, P = 0.01) (Fig. 5 ).

Differences were considered statistically significant at P ≤.05 (marginally significant at P ≤.1, highly significant at P ≤.01, and extremely significant at P <.001). 18 In addition, a post hoc power analysis was carried out to examine the power of the bond strength data using G*Power 3.1.7 software.

In general, the main effects were strong and significant, while the two‐way interactions were marginally significant ( p > .01).

Limited by the low number of modules, the probability ρ( k ) of a module interacting with k others showed a marginally significant fit to a power law: ρ( k )∼ k −0.77 ( P =0.010, see Figure 5A ).

Statistical significance of the effects was indicated as follows: highly significant (** P < 0.01), significant (* P < 0.05), and marginally significant (+ P < 0.1).

In fact, Gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA; see methods) using the reactome "Unfolded Protein Response (UPR)" gene set was marginally significant at 24 h (FDR < 25%) and highly significant at 21d (adjusted p < 0.01) (Additional file 3 ).

Note that the Bonferroni correction assumes independence between tests and is overly conservative in the presence of linkage, so it is worthwhile to mention that all marginally significant tests ( p < 0.01) correspond to combinations within and not between linkage groups (Table S5 ), supporting the consideration of loci within these four linkage groups as haplotypes for forensic calculations.

Results were considered statistically significant at p ≤ 0.05, and marginally significant when 0.05 < p ≤ 0.01.

The increase in use of drawings was marginally significant, with use changing from five students to 17 ( p = 0.010).