TSHI also had a marginally significant negative association with IL-8 in Model 1 (OR=0.538; 95%CI=0.287, 1.009; P =0.053), but not Model 3 ( P =0.280).
← all phrases
“marginally significant”
Sighted at
p>=0.1
In the literature
However, whereas the taxon and interaction effects are marginally significant ( anova , F 8, 23 =2.34, P =0.053), the high number of parameters leads to its rejection according to AIC C ( Table 2 ).
There was a marginally significant interaction, β= -0.06, p = .053, 95%CI = [-0.11, 0.0008].
The estimated odds ratio for the proportion of women who complete secondary school or more is marginally significant (p-value < 0.053), suggesting that a 10 percent increase in the proportion of women/peers who complete secondary school or more is associated with a two percentage point decrease in the proportion of daughters who are circumcised a generation later.
The analysis revealed a marginally significant main effect of sibling status with a moderate effect size ( F (2, 56) = 3.09, p = 0.053, ηp 2 = 0.10, 95% CI [0.00, 1.00]), which indicated a potential difference between at least two groups.
Effects of the narrative intervention Effects of the narrative intervention compared to pre-test scores The results of the paired samples t -test comparing pre-test scores and post-test scores in condition A show that there was a marginally significant difference between pre-test scores and post-test scores safer sex communication intentions with a sexual partner, t (70) = −1.97, p = .053, and a significant difference between pre-test scores and post-test scores for safer sex communication intentions with friends, t (71) = −3.01, p < .01.
However, results on the Control group showed a significant moderate negative correlation r = −0.579, p = 0.048 between change in positive affect and RT change for the detection of anger, and a marginally significant negative correlation (moderate), r = −0.570, p = 0.053 between change in positive affect and RT change for the detection of happiness.
Peer social skills was marginally significant in predicting fearfulness ( B = −0.13, p = .053).
While we did not observe systemic outlier samples, statistical analysis of three analytes (IL-1β, FGF-23, and FSH) became marginally significant, only in the HIV+ group (p=0.053, 0.068 and 0.085, Table 2 ).
Results Our finding showed that serum triglycerides (TG) (n=5, WMD -38.50 mg/dL, 95% confidence interval [CI] -61.68 to -15.31; P=0.001) and total cholesterol (TC) (n=4, WMD -18.70 mg/dL, 95%CI -34.85 to -2.53; P=0.023) decrease following diet intervention along with marginally significant weight reduction (n=5, WMD -3.61 mg/dL, 95%CI -7.25 to 0.04; P=0.053).
Perceived pain intensity during test stimulation The GLM mixed design ANOVA analysis revealed a marginally significant main effect of Time (F Greenhouse-Geisser (1.079, 14.022) = 4.363, p = .053, η 2 = .251).
Without multiple test correction, one additional hospital with high PWD was found to be marginally significant (p=0.053).
The regression analysis revealed a marginally significant relationship between prolonged grief and amygdala-to-whole-brain structural connectivity (Standardised β = 0.313, SE = 0.156, t = 2.006, p = .053).
Testing strategies differed by quarantine measures to marginally significant ( p = 0.053) extent ( Table 2 ).
The model including the diversity variable revealed a significant interaction between face race and index number, χ 2 (1, N = 89) = 6.95, p = 0.008, and a marginally significant interaction between face race, diversity of experience, and index number, χ 2 (2, N = 89) = 5.87, p = 0.053.
Likewise, in lag1 trials, a marginally significant main effect of time-cue condition (F(1, 39) = 3.98, p = 0.053, η p 2 = 0.09) revealed a tendency of higher T2 accuracy when the preceding trial was also a lag1 trial (compared with a single-target trial); however, the effect appeared to be independent of whether or not participants paid attention to the temporal information ( Figure 2 E).
We also found that the differences between conventional and instrumental gestures were marginally significant ( p = .053), while there was no significance between conventional gestures and the production of symbolic gestures ( p = .065).
The difference in the pepsin- ogen I/II ratio for the antibody-negative participants was marginally significant (P=0.053) between the 1 capsule group (5 persons) and the 6 capsule group (16 persons).
While we found no effect of trait mindfulness ( b = −0.30, SE = 0.19, p = 0.123) on the disengagement coping strategy distraction and denial, orientation towards experience had a negative, marginally significant relationship with this coping strategy ( b = −0.24, SE = 0.12, p = 0.053).
For the Control condition, laterality effect was marginally significant, F(2,38) = 3.2, p = 0.053.
There was a marginally significant Group × Time interaction predicting TEPS scores (b = 3.34, 95% CI: [−0.04, 6.72], f = 0.272, χ 2(1) = 3.75, p = .053), such that participants in iNarratives with Coaching reported a marginally greater increase in pleasure compared with the participants in iCBT with Coaching during treatment.
When comparing only the L1014F frequency between groups at Chulaimbo, the difference is marginally significant (OR = 3.957, 95% CI = [0.781–21.713], P = 0.053; Fischer’s exact test) and could be limited by a low sample size in the resistance group ( N = 14), whereas there was no significant difference in L1014S frequencies between susceptible and resistant groups (OR = 0.525, 95% CI = [0.197–1.364], P = 0.185, Fischer’s exact test).
Although age was a marginally significant predictor in phase 1 (p-value = 0.053) and not related in phase 2 (p-value = 0.985), a one-year increase in the SW's age was significantly associated with a 5% [OR = 0.95 (95% CI 0.93–0.98, p-value = 0.001)] decrease in the odds of supplying condomless-sex.
We noted that the ‘communion’ measure is marginally significant (p = 0.053) and the ‘NFS: Past’ measure was not statistically significant.
In this analysis, carboplatin dose was a marginally significant factor (odds ratio, 2.06; 95% confidence interval, 0.99–4.29; p = 0.053).