“marginally significant”

The interaction between probe type and stimulus novelty condition was marginally significant, F (1, 63) = 3.94, p = 0.051, η p 2 = 0.06, resulting from a greater PI effect in the repeated ( M = 0.07) than unique ( M = 0.03) condition.

A paired samples t -test showed that there was a marginally significant difference ( t = -2.024, df = 35, p = 0.051) in the difference in pitch range (Tones 4 – 1) between IDS (mean = 97.724 Hz, sd = 75.934) and ADS (mean = 66.987 Hz, sd = 60.927).

The results of the multinomial logistic regression analysis ( Table 2 ) revealed that teachers with: (1) entrepreneurship/business management experience ( p < 0.05), (2) innovation-entrepreneurship research experience ( p < 0.05), or (3) competition mentoring experience (marginally significant, p = 0.051), were 4.82, 4.72, and 4.70 times more likely, respectively, to belong to the “High IEE-competent group” (C1) than the “Moderate IEE-competent group” (C3).

In the IDHmt group, the OS difference according to the EOR was marginally significant (p = 0.051).

Participants at the UK campus reported having had more contact with ASC individuals, b = − 5.39, p < .001 and contact was a marginally significant predictor of acceptance of ASC, b = 0.06, p = .051.

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 ).

For accuracy, there was only a marginally significant main effect of attended stimulus, F (1,8) = 5.3, p = 0.051, η p 2 = 0.40.

For respiratory conditions, inability to maintain adequate warmth during winter (EP1) demonstrated a marginally significant association ( p = 0.051, η = 0.109), with 81.6% of participants with lung disease unable to keep their homes warm compared to 18.4% who maintained comfortable temperatures.

Corsi SPAN backward was marginally significant ( p = 0.051).

Only the MFA values of the lIFOF in the second time point had a marginally significant difference (F>M), t (36) = 2.02, P = 0.051. l IFOF Here, a significant main effect of time was revealed, F (1, 35) = 49.94, P < 0.01 with a large effect size η 2 = 0.588.

tubiflora , results were both marginally significant with P -value = 0.051 or 0.048, respectively) for alternative coding of inflorescence types.

A marginally significant effect of temperature was apparent when data from the two t 5 CO 2 treatments were pooled and subject to PLS-DA (p = 0.051; Supplementary Figure S2 ).

Supporting this impression, the 2 x 2 (Electrode x Group) MANOVA revealed significant main effects of Group ( F (1, 62) = 4.31, p = .042, ƞ p 2 = .07), and Electrode ( F (1, 62) = 15.42, p = .001, Wilks’ Lambda = .801, ƞ p 2 = .20), that were modified by a marginally significant interaction of Group and Electrode ( F (1, 62) = 3.97, p = .051, Wilks’ Lambda = .940, ƞ p 2 = .06).

Athletic identity is a marginally significant predictor (β = .21, SE = .79, t = 1.98, p = .051).

Nuclear grade 3 tumors showed a marginally significant association with axillary surgery (OR = 3.41, 95% CI: 1.00-11.70, p = 0.051), while younger age (< 40 years) demonstrated a similar trend (OR = 3.16, 95% CI: 0.96–10.37, p = 0.058).

OTR binding in females was also marginally significant in the same direction in the cingulate cortex ( F 3 = 2.89, p = 0.051; optical densities, MAN1 = 0.107 ± 0.03, MAN1–7 = 0.115 ± 0.02, MAN7 = 0.126 ± 0.3, MAN0 = 0.248 ± 0.06) and the lateral septum (LS; F 3 = 2.97, p = 0.054; optical densities, MAN1 = 0.114 ± 0.03, MAN1–7 = 0.15 ± 0.02, MAN7 = 0.181 ± 0.7, MAN0 = 0.289 ± 0.09).

Furthermore, there was a marginally significant interaction of hemisphere × MA [ F (2, 100) = 3.07, p = 0.051, η p 2 = 0.06].

Higher scores on the openness scale were associated with subsequent fidelity-consistent modifications at a marginally significant level ( p = 0.051), suggesting that clinicians who endorsed greater openness to trying new interventions may be more likely to make modifications that preserved core elements of CBT.

Those who perceived physical health as poor had high stress levels but it was marginally significant (β = 2.48, p = 0.051).

For those with MHAO, the association of IHTG content with risk of pre-diabetes plus diabetes was marginally significant, and the adjusted OR (95% CI) of per SD increase of IHTG content was 1.55 (1.00 to 2.40, p=0.051).

After the ethnicity stratification analysis, the above phenomenon was found to be significant in Asian populations (OR = 0.686, 95% CI = 0.633–0.744, P < .001), marginally significant in Caucasians (OR = 0.887, 95% CI = 0.786–1.001, P = .051), and not significant in other populations (OR = 0.851, 95% CI = 0.558–1.297, P = .452).

After controlling for the age of the referee in a partial correlation, the relationship between height and experience became marginally significant ( r (26) = −.37; p = .051).

Effect of MVMS on DBP A marginally significant lowering effect of MVMS on DBP was observed: The overall effect size (WMD) was −0.71 mmHg (95% CI, −1.43 to 0.00 mmHg; p = 0.051) ( Figure 4 ).

For contingent elaborations, there was a marginally significant positive relationship with working memory (b = 0.33, SE = 0.17, χ 2 = 3.81, p = 0.051).

When we did that, for SVO the pooled analysis showed an overall effect (β = 0.069, t = 1.53, p = .013), which means the effect of the target (compared to baseline) is consistent in this condition; for S ba OV the difference between the target condition and the baseline was not statistically significant (β = 0.011, t = 0.27, p = .079); the pooled results showed a marginally significant difference between the target condition and the baseline in O, S ba OV condition (β = 0.021, t = 0.67, p = .051).).