“marginally significant”

A marginally significant effect of condition [ F (2,43.76) = 3.11, p = 0.054; see the mean scores and confidence intervals presented in Table 1 ] on the change scores pertaining to positive emotions was observed.

The interaction among the mating strategy, mating dimension and resource-gaining capacity was marginally significant, F (2, 110) = 2.994, p = 0.054, η ρ 2 = 0.052.

Additionally, patients with PD-L1 positive (TPS ≥ 1%) had a higher pCR rate (nominal P = 0.025) and a marginally significant higher MPR rate (nominal P = 0.054).

A 2 × 3 analysis of variance showed no main effect of pain group, F (2,1520) = 1.42, P = 0.243, a marginally significant effect of sex, F (1,1520) = 3.70, P = 0.054, where females (mean = 24.73, SD = 18.47) scored slightly higher than males (mean = 23.03, SD = 16.02), and no interaction, F (2,1520) = 1.48, P = 0.229. 3.3.

It is also noteworthy that the percentage of ripened grain was also higher in pre-colonized ARC5955, and this difference was marginally significant (p = 0.054).

The only effect that involved relevance was a marginally significant three-way interaction between relevance, distance and K max , B = 0.482, SE = 0.250, z = 1.93, p = 0.054.

(2013 ) were marginally significant in our data set (p-values = 0.054 and 0.056).

Further analysis showed that the differences between unrelated and related words were significant at the central ( p = 0.002) and posterior regions ( p = 0.006) and marginally significant at the frontal region ( p = 0.054) of the left hemisphere.

When fuel type was entered as the three categories presented in Table 2 (clean fuel, chimney stove, open fire), adjusted mean birth weights were 2,834 (gas/electricity), 2,765 (wood/coal stove with chimney), and 2,733 (open fire). The overall difference was nonsignificant, but the difference between the clean fuel group and the chimney stove group was marginally significant (p = 0.054).

When the third tertile patients were compared with the second tertile, we found marginally significant higher primary event and ICU admission ( p = 0.054).

Moreover, we do not observe any significant difference between scripts ( F (1, 78) = 0.975, p = 0.33, η p 2 = 0.01) and a marginally significant interaction ( F (3, 156) = 2.967, p = 0.054, η p 2 = 0.04).

Very High SES also shows reduced odds, though marginally significant (OR = 0.767, p = 0.054).

When all infected patients (infection without SIRS, sepsis, and severe sepsis) as a group were compared with the non-infected patients, the difference was marginally significant ( P = 0.054) (Figure 2 ).

In the Sm2170 treatment, host outcrossing rates showed a marginally significant decline from generation 0 to generation 6 ( p = .054) and were significantly lower at generations 12 and 18.

Additionally, there was a marginally significant increase in I-FABP levels in lean patients when compared to non-lean individuals ( p = 0.054, Figure 7 a).

The pooled model revealed that this difference in selection affecting urban and forest CS was marginally significant (CS × habitat interaction, p = 0.054; table 4 ).

We observed a marginally significant enrichment of rare damaging missense mutations (MAF<1e-3, REVEL>0.5, Enrichment=3.6, p-value=0.054, binomial test) in the complement pathway.

However, the decline was marginally significant for total CT scan utilization ( P = 0.054).

pallidus for cyt b show a marginally significant difference between the mean number of haplotypes (2.50 and 1.90, respectively; U =490.5, P =0.054) and a strongly significant difference between mean number of polymorphic sites per locality (3.89 and 1.20, respectively; U =543.0, P =0.007).

The post-hoc multiple comparisons (Bonferroni-corrected) revealed a marginally significant difference between the four- and five-year-old children on ANS accuracy (95% Confidence Interval [−21.06, 0.14], p = 0.054), but the difference between the four- and six-year-old group was not significant (95% CI [−17.92, 2.76], p = 0.221).

Meanwhile, the difference in cognitive functioning was marginally significant (CF, p = 0.054).

High staining patterns of ER-β1 conferred a marginally significant protective effect against developing metastases in the univariable model (HR 0.39, 95% CI 0.15–1.01, Mantel–Cox test p = 0.054, log-rank test p = 0.045, Figure 2 ), something that did not apply in the multivariable Cox models ( Table 2 ).

Furthermore, interaction between FTO rs9939609 polymorphism with the variables (BMI, mFG, serum testosterone and kisspeptin levels) showed significant interaction between FTO AA genotype and mFG ( p = 0.042); whereas the AT genotype of FTO gene showed a marginally significant interaction ( p = 0.054) with mFG.

None of the simple effects of non-esteem identification were significant (all p s > .13), but when we decomposed this interaction by salience condition, the two-way interaction between education and non-esteem identification was marginally significant when education was salient ( B = −.42, SE = .217, p = .054, 95% CI [−0.846, 0.007]) but not when it was not salient ( B = .36, SE = .243, p = .14, 95% CI [−0.115, 0.841]).

Another round of independent t -tests revealed that 498 natural science majors exhibited a marginally significant difference from 109 social science majors on PosFlow (NS Mean = 30.81, SD = 5.59; SS Mean = 29.66, SD = 5.86; df = 605, t = 1.927, p = 0.054, r 2 = 0.061, Cohen’s d = 0.157) with a medium effect size, while there was a significant difference on NegFlow (NS Mean = 15.35, SD = 3.62; SS Mean = 13.61, SD = 3.49; df = 605, t = –4.568, p < 0.001, r 2 = 0.033, Cohen’s d = 0.371) with a medium effect size (see Table 3 ).