“marginally significant”

Independent sample t tests showed a marginally significant effect of phone use for the stair 1 ( t (13.8) = 2.65, p = 0.019, d = 1.17), and significant increases in walking times when using a phone for stairs 2 ( t (22.4) = 4.84, p < 0.001, d = 1.71) and stairs 3 ( t (12.1) = 3.04, p = 0.010, d = 1.48).

While the indirect effects of the overweight/obese body image condition (compared to the athletic thin condition) on AVG ( p = 0.058) and PA motivation ( p = 0.085) via NE were marginally significant, the indirect effects of the average body image condition (compared to the athletic thin condition) on AVG ( p = 0.019) and PA motivation ( p = 0.046) via NE remained significant, indicating the robustness of this particular effect.

Although the difference of adrenal limb thickness was marginally significant between obese and non-obese women, adrenal tumors was more frequently found in obese women compared to non-obese women (P=0.019).

For the left IFG and left STG, the models show significant fit and marginally significant fit (left IFG: R 2 = 0.312, p = 0.019, left STG: R 2 = 0.230, p = 0.074).

Effects of SSES on RS-EEG microstates The ANOVA results showed that the interactions of SES × SES level were significant for occurrence of MS3 [F (1, 150) = 8.629, p = 0.004, η 2 = 0.055] and marginally significant for contribution of MS3 [F (1, 150) = 5.637, p = 0.019, η 2 = 0.036], while there are no other significant results; the main effects of SES and SES level, as well as the interaction of SES × SES level were not significant for duration of MS3 (See Table 2 ).

Interestingly, the association between active SMU (e.g., posting content) and body dysmorphic symptoms became marginally significant (standardised beta = 0.13; p = 0.019) when controlling for anxiety and depressive symptoms.

melanogaster to conspecific and heterospecific rivals following manipulation of tactile cues When tactile cues were removed by separating males from rivals using porous netting, there was a marginally significant effect of treatment on focal D. melanogaster mating duration (KW χ 5 2 = 13.54 , p = .019; Figure 2 d).

Further, there was a marginally significant enrichment of lipids containing the fatty acids 16:1, 18:1, and 20:3 in their structure (hypergeometric test, p = 1.91 × 10 −2 , 1.35 × 10 −2 and 4.79 × 10 −2 , correspondingly; Figure 2 d; Table S4 ).

The per allele effect for TCF7L2 (rs7903146) for affecting blood 25(OH)D concentration was marginally significant Beta ± SE (-0.011, 0.005), P = 0.02, Z score = -2.30, and no association was observed in KCNQ1 (rs2237896) with 25(OH)D concentration Beta ± SE (-0.005, 0.01]), P = 0.26, Z score = -1.18 after adjusting for age, gender, and T2D (Supplementary Table 2 ).

However, we did find a marginally significant difference in gender, with slightly more boys missing data (N = 102) compared to girls (N = 95), p = 0.02.

Given the three dependent variables, Bonferroni correction for multiple hypotheses testing yielded a p -value of 0.016, and the effect remained marginally significant ( p = 0.02).

Finally, 519 of these gene overlapped with the genes dysregulated in either autism, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, depression or alcoholism [ 34 ], with a marginally significant overrepresentation for the schizophrenia group (Fisher’s exact test OR [95%CI] = 1.3 [1.04, Inf], p = 0.02, Supplementary Fig.

Mothers' lower FES Cohesion score also predicted Internalising ( P =0.01) and Externalising ( P =0.001) problems and was marginally significant for Total Problems ( P =0.02).

Comparing mean size between fertile and sterile introgressions, we find no significant difference using the complete sublines ( p = 0.11), but a marginally significant difference using all 108 sublines ( p = 0.02).

Multi-agent chemotherapy was shown to be linked with a marginally significant increase in overall survival (HR:0.79, p = 0.02) and a marginally significant increase in progression-free survival (PFS) (HR:0.86, p = 0.05) [ 69 ].

In contrast to the global ancestry estimates noted above, these local ancestry estimates at the MYH9 locus, did show a significant association with non-diabetic ESKD status in the Hispanic American population ( P = 0.0002 for Welch's two-sample t -test, P = 0.0009 for Kolmogorov–Smirnov test) and marginally significant association in the African American population ( P = 0.02 for Welch's two-sample t -test, P = 0.06 for Kolmogorov–Smirnov test).

Tissue biomarker changes Although the median decrease in Ki-67 change in non-obese participants was similar among the three dosing regimens, the median reduction of 4% in Ki67 in the TIW dose schedule in obese women was less than the 8% median reduction in the QD arm which was marginally significant ( p = 0.02).

Interestingly, this later SNP (rs2305198; HK1) was marginally significant in univariable analysis (p = 0.02), illustrating that its inclusion in the model and significant association are conditional on the genotypes at rs7072268 (HK1).

The excess risk of suburban residence relative to urban residence was marginally significant for non-cardiovascular death (adjusted HR 1.36; 95% CI 1.03, 1.80; P=0.02; Table 4 ).

FUT status and growth indicators Delta changes in WLZ were significantly higher in Lewis positive compared to Lewis negative children and delta change in WAZ were also marginally significant and higher in Lewis positive children ( p = 0.02 and 0.07, respectively).

But interestingly, a marginally significant association of 825TT genotype with increased 55% FD risk was yielded only under the additive model (OR = 1.55, P = 0.02).

This association remained marginally significant with multivariate logistic regression; OR 1.0 (95%CI; 1.0–1.1, P = 0.02) ( Table 3 ).

Latakia also demonstrated a significant positive association with ASD (β = 1.84, 95% CI [.48, 3.19], P = .01) and a marginally significant association with PHQ-9 (β = 1.65, 95% CI [.19, 3.12], P = .02), but no significant association with GAD-7 (β = 1.21, 95% CI [−.21, 2.65], P = .09).

The modified YGJT group showed a marginally significant reduction in myelosuppression compared to the control group (RR 0.63, 95% CI: 0.43–0.92, p = 0.02) ( Figure 8A ).

This was marginally significant ( p = 0.02) on a direct t test, but not on an ANOVA including GMRw/IP 3 R-RNAi data with and without EGTA ( p = 0.18).