“marginally significant”

The difference between the 2 groups in incidence of highest HR ≥ 110 bpm was marginally significant (34.52% vs. 19.23%, p = 0.055).

russatus females exposed to blue ALAN were significantly higher ( P < 0.05) and marginally significant in females exposed to white light ( P = 0.055) compared to controls (Fig. 3 C).

No other SNPs previously reported to show association could be confirmed in this population, with the possible exceptions of rs11200638 (G>A) in HTRA1 and the LOC387715 SNP rs10490924, which show marginally significant associations with DR (allelic P = 0.055 and P = 0.07, respectively).

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).

A 2 (group) by 2 (task) repeated measures ANOVA for the slope values showed a marginally significant interaction between task and musical training [ F (1, 37) = 3.940, p = 0.055, partial η 2 = 0.096].

MANOVA using the first nine PC scores indicated marginally significant sex differences were detected in the historical group (Pillai's trace = 0.29, F = 2.04, p = 0.055).

There was only a marginally significant interaction effect between congruency and pubertal status [ F (2, 113) = 2.98, p = 0.055, η2 = 0.05].

In our study, the Kaplan-Meier curve before PSM showed higher DFS in the HIPEC group, but the difference was marginally significant ( P = 0.055), likely due to baseline imbalances between the two groups.

We found a marginally significant effect of Language Group ( B = -.73, SE = .38, p = .055), as well as significant effects of counting ( B = .30, SE = .05, p < .0001), and Age ( B = .15, SE = .03, p < .0001).

Second, an additional interaction between norm violation and effect turned out to be marginally significant p = 0.055, with Pearson (χ 2 = 29.978; p = 0.569) and Cox & Snell = 0.496.

Inflammation had a marginally significant effect on right-sided STS responses to viewing emotional facial expressions [ F (15,1) = 4.37, p = .055] with no significant influence on activity in any of the other face response regions reported in Table 1 .

In terms of the COPM_P, the improvement was marginally significant ( p = 0.055), with a medium effect size ( r = 0.48).

Differences in years of education were marginally significant ( P =.055), with Hispanic decedents (median = 13 years) and black decedents (14 years) observed to have the lowest years of education compared with white decedents (14 years).

We found increased abundances of Deferribacteres and Bacteroidetes in the aged mice both marginally significant ( p = 0.055, p = 0.11, respectively).

Consistent with previous results regarding the UG and the DG, we found a marginally significant main effect for the Game: F (1, 90) = 3.78, p = 0.055, η 2 p = 0.04, indicating that the proportion of equal split offers was higher for UG participants ( M = 70.0%, SD = 40.9) compared to DG participants ( M = 55.1%, SD = 45.9).

Leaf size had a marginally significant influence ( F = 6.68 , p = 0.055 ) for T. serratus R., but extraction duration had no significant effect ( p = 0.494 ).

When we repeated the analysis using the negative value of FIB-4 < 1.45 (rule out criterion for the presence of LF), we found an inverse association between low FIB-4 score and AEs at univariable OR: 0.45, 95%CI 0.24–0.86, p = 0.015, a marginally significant value at multivariable analysis (using Model A variables) with OR 0.55, 95%CI 0.30–1.01, p = 0.055).

This association persisted as a marginally significant trend for long-term effects ( r s = 0.745, p = 0.055, q = 0.059).

Indeed, we did see that concurrent load increased partner-duplications at generation, consistent with its demonstrated effect on working memory ( Quinn and Ralston, 1986 ; Smyth and Pendleton, 1989 ; Lawrence et al., 2001 ; Can et al., 2017 ), and decreased correct recall of partner actions [this simple effect was marginally significant, F (2,34) = 3.17, MSe = 2.33, p = 0.055, η p 2 = 0.157].

VEGF-C was predictive for benefit from adjuvant treatment with paclitaxel (E-T-CMF arm) for OS (test for interaction, Wald's P = 0.038), and marginally significant for DFS (test for interaction, Wald's P = 0.055).

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 difference in OS by rLN was marginally significant in the entire model (P=0.055).

Demographic characteristics Demographic characteristics, entered in step 1 of the regression, significantly predicted COVID Stress Scales scores, except for worry about the socioeconomic impact of COVID‐19, which was marginally significant ( p = 0.055).

A moderation analysis showed a marginally significant interaction between preoperative anxiety and sex on chronic postsurgical pain (b = 0.15, 95% CI [−0.003, 0.30], p = 0.055).

But, a statistically marginally significant difference was observed regarding neutral mood ( P = 0.055) in HCs and positive mood ( P = 0.076) in BPs.