“marginally significant”

On multivariate analysis the presence of focal defects on DMSA scan predicted recurrent UTIs [OR 3.89, (95% CI 1.2, 12.6), p = 0.024]; female sex was marginally significant [OR 3.22, (95% CI 0.995, 10.423), p = 0.051], but the number of UTIs prior to scan did not remain statistically significant ( p = 0.059).

There was a marginally significant relationship between body-mass index and the post-dose plasma nevirapine concentration at week 2 (Pearson’s r = -0.31, p = 0.051), but not at week 4 (r = 0.02, p = 0.90) or week 8 (r = 0.09, p = 0.64), and no significant relationship between body-mass index and pre-dose nevirapine concentrations at week 2 (r = -0.013, p = 0.92), week 4 (r = -0.06, p = 0.69) or week 8 (r = 0.20, p = 0.25) (Fig. 2 ).

This effect of framing condition was qualified by a marginally significant interaction between framing condition and age [ X 2 (2)=5.93, p =0.051]; specifically, the effect of the Extrinsic framing condition relative to the Neutral framing condition grew significantly less strong over development [ b =1.92, SE =0.88, 95% CI (0.19, 3.66), p =0.03], but no such age-related change was observed in the effect of the Intrinsic framing condition relative to the Neutral framing condition ( p =0.82).

A marginally significant result was found (F 26 = 4.22; p = 0.051; r 2 = 0.144).

There was also a marginally significant 2-way interaction of face outcome and face stimuli race F (2, 35) = 3.24, p = 0.051, ƞ 2 = 0.16.

Given the higher prevalence of males among patients with epilepsy, the sex distribution of the enrolled subjects showed a marginally significant difference (P = 0.051).

Results Experiment 1: AUT items as word only or word + image As regards idea fluency, we found a marginally significant effect of condition in the dual procedure (within-subject comparison), with higher number of ideas generated for word + image than word only items ( p = 0.051, η p 2 = 0.144, large effect size ; Supplementary Table 1 , Fig. 1 ).

Interestingly, this effect was more pronounced in the Simon task than in the Eriksen task, as reflected in a marginally significant interaction, F (1, 31) = 4.10, p = . 051, η p 2 = .12 (with p = . 812 and η p 2 < . 01 for the main effect of task).

Accordingly, a marginally significant three-way interaction between Group (“small” vs. “large”), Coherence (5% vs. 10%) and Direction (0° vs. ±60°) was obtained, F (1, 26) = 4.19, p = 0.051, η P 2 = 0.14.

The interaction between habitat and years was marginally significant (β = 0.140 ± 0.129, p = 0.051), suggesting that recovery is faster in dry moor habitats.

Silver fir profited from high maximum temperatures, as the effect was marginally significant with a 1°C increase in positive maximum temperatures reducing the hazard of death by 36.4% ( p = 0.051).

Having children under 12 years became marginally significant (-2.38, 95% CI: -4.77, 0.01; P = 0.051).

The average urinary iodine concentration of pregnant women with a family history of thyroid disease was higher when compared with those without ( Table 3 ). The existence of a marginally significant ( p = 0.051) and negative (r = -0.37) relationship between the urinary iodine concentration of pregnant women and neonatal TSH was observed ( Table 3 ).

The difference between CSR scores at post-treatment and follow-up was marginally significant at p = 0.051.

When checked for differences between the two land-use types for major soil variables, a significant difference in TOC (glmm PQL; t = −2.8, p < 0.05) and a marginally significant difference in TN (glmm PQL; t = −2.0, p = 0.051), was present.

Self‐rated health was marginally significant ( b = 0.331, SE = 0.169, p = 0.051), but also demonstrated a protective effect against the negative effects of loneliness on PWB.

In our study, which was conducted over a period of 30 months, we found an overall recurrence rate of 16.4%, with a marginally significant difference (p-value = 0.051) between the counseled (12.3%) and the non counseled groups (28.6%).

The chi-square test of group differences on the dichotomous indicator was significant ( p < 0.05); however, when controlling for income and education as well as baseline CES-D score, there was a marginally significant effect of group condition on EPDS diagnosis outcome (cutoff ≥ 10), B = −6.185, p = 0.051, odds ratio = 0.002, 95% CI = [0.000, 1.018].

When comparing the CA and PD groups, we found a marginally significant difference, such that the PD group has a higher score (t = 1.97, p = 0.051, effect size = 0.34).

The results showed significant Neurotracker learning effects in all intervention groups and a marginally significant learning effect in the control group ( p = .051, d = 0.45).

Our findings indicate that among participants with a BMI below 29.9, there was no noteworthy alteration observed in TG levels, while HDL demonstrated a marginally significant increase ( p = 0.051) ( Supplementary Table S1 ).

A substantial improvement was found in all groups at 3 months, followed by a slight increase at 6 months, which is marginally significant in group A (adjusted p = 0.051) and significant in groups B and C (see Figure 7 ).

The only IgG subclass that showed a marginally significant difference was IgG2 ( p = 0.051), with higher levels observed in the control group than in the LTBI group.

We then explored the interaction of sex and age (modelled as a restricted cubic spline) on the risk of outcomes; there was evidence of a marginally significant interaction for TE ( P = 0.051), with risk that tended to increase in younger females compared with younger male patients (see Supplementary material online , Figure S3 , left panel).

The clr of AHQ/VRQ was marginally significant ( P = 0.051) and was left in the model.