We also found a marginally significant effect of time on estimated weight in kilograms for Roemer: (1) t (54.389) = -1.960, p = .055, 95% CI [-3.99, .04].
← all phrases
“marginally significant”
Sighted at
p>=0.1
In the literature
melanogaster (see Discussion), showed a significant down-regulation in diapausing and reproducing females compared to young females and a marginally significant (FC = 1.8 and p = 0.055) up-regulation in diapausing females compared to reproducing females.
The bandwidth difference between the AE and NDE was marginally significant ( z = 1.602, P = 0.055).
Relationship among glymphatic functioning, rumination, and depression We found a marginally significant difference in glymphatic functioning, as indicated by the DTI-ALPS, between MDD patients and HC ( t = −1.95, p = 0.055) ( Figure 1B ).
There was also a marginally significant correlation between the estimated effect size of these SNPs on birth length and the reported effect size on adult height (Pearson’s ρ = 0.073, p = 0.055).
5/18 versus 1/20 were remitters; this is only a marginally significant difference (Chi‐square test, p = .055; Fishers Exact test, p = .083).
Only GPX5 showed marginally significant differential expression with FC = 1.6 (uncorrected p = 0.055).
Meta-regression analysis showed a marginally significant inverse relationship between cumulative treatment duration and cognitive improvement (β = –0.001, p = 0.055, R 2 = 0.067).
Apartment-Task Performance As illustrated in Figure 2 , there was a marginally significant difference between the three experimental conditions regarding the apartment-task performance, F (2, 142) = 2.96, p = 0.055, η 2 p = 0.04.
The main effect of the characteristic words on the P3 peak was marginally significant ( F (1,17) = 4.26, P = 0.055, η 2 = 0.20), with the target words "Negative words" inducing a significantly higher peak ( M = 5.84) than "Positive words" ( M = 5.39).
In the final model (model 3), the association with sedentary screen-based behavior was marginally significant ( p = 0.055).
The tACS 3 effect was marginally significant (t 38 = 1.98, p = 0.055, Cohen’s d = 0.63).
Additionally, Surgeon 4 demonstrated a marginally significant association with glaucoma risk (HR = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.20 to 1.02, p = 0.055).
Income was marginally significant (p = 0.055), indicating a potential trend toward higher income being associated with better QoL, which warrant further investigation.
In Stage II, the post-treatment differences remained marginally significant (HADS-A: p = 0.055; HADS-D: p = 0.050; EORTC QLQ-H&N35: p = 0.065).
However, this relationship was marginally significant for the trochanteric region ( P = 0.055).
LND) and canopy cover (tree or no tree) was marginally significant ( p = 0.055, R 2 m = 0.7).
The difference in residual corneal thickness between the two groups was not statistically significant, but was marginally significant ( p = 0.055).
Alone, ERQ-Reappraisal was a marginally significant predictor of reaction times, F (1, 83.4) = 3.79, p = .055.
In line with this, univariate effects were insignificant as well (albeit marginally significant for pressure at p = .055, all other p ’s >0.656).
Vectorial Capacity models Assuming an equal survivorship of 0.85 for adult females from both high and low-density treatments, there was a marginally significant effect of larval competition on vectorial capacity at the 6-day IP (F = 5.65, df = 1,6; P = 0.055) but not at the 9 (F = 0.94, df = 1,6; P = 0.37) or 12-day IP (F = 0.36, df = 1,6; P = 0.56) or cVC (F = 0.20, df = 1,7; P = 0.66) (Fig 4A and 4B ).
The between-group comparison showed that the locomotor activity count was the highest in stress-exposed rats, i.e., it was significantly higher in this group compared to the control (* p < 0.05) and the stress-exposed fructose-fed group ( # p < 0.05), while the comparison with the fructose-fed group showed a marginally significant p -value ( p = 0.055).
The difference between the two groups was marginally significant, t (55.081) = 1.964, p = 0.055, CI 95% (mean difference) = [−0.030, 3.015].
A marginally significant association was found for SARS-CoV-2 positivity within the age group ( p = 0.055), and no statistically significant association was found for SARS-CoV-2 positivity within gender ( p = 0.44) (Table 2 ).
Regarding the frequency of traumatic actions, time had a marginally significant main effect [ F (2,28) = 3.215, p = 0.055, η 2 = 0.187].