“marginally significant”

Additionally, a marginally significant improvement was found in anxiety symptom scores ( Z = −1.90, P = 0.058).

However, we found a marginally significant crossover interaction between the 2 ( β = −0.61, SE = 0.32, P = 0.058).

The association with severe obesity (BMI ≥30 kg/m 2 ) was marginally significant (aOR 2.247, 95% CI: 0.971–5.197, p =0.058) ( Table 2 ).

rs6498169 showed a marginally significant trend between HT subjects and control group under codominant model ( P = 0.058), dominant model ( P = 0.054) and under recessive model ( P = 0.050).

There was, however, a marginally significant main effect of Age Group for the subjective importance of observing the recommendations regarding hand-washing, F (2, 281) = 2.88, p = .058, η p 2 = .020, with the OA group perceiving the observation of these recommendations as significantly more important than the YA group ( p = .025) and the MA group ( p = .032).

OA showed marginally significant lower use of rEV information [mean SD rEV r 2 values YA: 0.40 0.13, OA: 0.35 0.13, between group difference t (97) = 1.92, p = 0.058, d = 0.40], without alteration in the use of pWIN information [mean SD pWIN r 2 values YA: 0.03 0.04, OA: 0.04 0.04, between group difference t (96) = 1.27, p = 0.21, d = 0.27].

After adjusting for sociodemographic variables (sex, age, race and ethnicity, educational level, and marital status), physical activity, smoking status, alcohol drinking status, hypertension, CKD, BMI, and HbA1c in model 3, the association between Klotho and KS was marginally significant (OR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.57–1.01; p = 0.058).

Interestingly, 1 memory B cell subcluster (C2) with relative upregulation of MALAT1 , which was reported to be associated with viability of diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) cell, 39 and TXNIP , which is required for expansion of germinal center B cell, 40 showed marginally significant depletion in IST non-responders ( P = 0.058; Figure 6 C–E).

Bonferroni-corrected post-hoc analysis on the interaction effect revealed a significant difference (p = .03) between CS+ 1ws (mean = 523.77 ms; sd = 149.42 ms) and CS+ 2ws (mean = 540.63 ms; sd = 161.03 ms) in the second hemiblock; a marginally significant effect emerged also for the first hemiblock (p = .058), with CS+ 1ws (mean = 517.36 ms; sd = 142.10 ms) presenting slightly faster reaction times than CS+ 2ws (mean = 527.55 ms; sd = 147.02 ms).

In the case of N, a similar but much weaker pattern of associations was observed so that only in the case of years of education was the interaction marginally significant (p = 0.058).

ERP Results N1 The repeated-measures ANOVA revealed a marginally significant main effect of Emotion ( F (2,29) = 2.991, p = 0.058, η 2 = 0.091).

Changes in GIP AUC did not differ among groups ( P = 0.76); however, there was a marginally significant 7% decrease ( P = 0.058) with all groups combined.

The data were analysed by the Mann-Whitney U test and showed that FGF10 gene expression had a marginally significant correlation with the patient’s sex (P<0.058).

We found there were increasing trends in the BMI mean values for most age groups in men except that the test for trend was marginally significant for men aged 50–59 ( p = 0.058).

Surgical approach for colorectal surgery ( Figure 2 ) resulted marginally significant for OS ( p = 0.058).

The highest quartile (Q4, >1.45 mmol/L) exhibited a weaker, marginally significant effect (OR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.47-1.01, P=0.058).

An ANCOVA 4 comparing the number of smiles that participants reported detecting (hits and false alarms) across the conditions revealed a marginally significant effect of prestige, F (2,92) = 3.68, p = .058, η 2 = .04.

However, a marginally significant difference in RTs between the two groups for disengaging by conflict [ F (1,56) = 3.734, p = 0.058, ω 2 = 0.044], suggesting that the effects tend to be lower for AVGPs (15.52 ± 51.68) than for NAVGPs (47.49 ± 57.09) 2 , although the effect size was relatively small.

Interestingly, we found a marginally significant positive correlation between intratumor difference of T‐cell clonality and clonal TMB in LP ( P = 0.058, r = 0.94; Fig. 4D ), implying the association of clonal mutational burden and immune microenvironment.

For the deltamethrin-treated LLINs, the rate was one third that of the control, 15.1 vs 49.5, respectively, with a marginally significant difference (z = -2.34, p = 0.058) and a reduction percentage of 69.5%.

A likelihood ratio test comparing this unconstrained model (M3 in Table 7 ) to the most constrained model (M1) was marginally significant ( Δ χ ( Δ d f = 2 ) 2 = 5.68, p = 0.058), ΔRMSEA = 0.01, ΔCFI = 0.01.

A two-way repeated-measures ANOVA (Sex×Kissing) revealed only a significant main effect of Sex for average spectral power at the individual maximum, F(1,28) = 4.6, P<0.05, η 2 = 0.14, and a marginally significant main effect of Sex for average spectral power across 60 Hz, F(1,28) = 3.9, P = 0.058, η 2 = 0.12, indicating a higher spectral lip EMG power in women than in men.

The association between experiencing conflicts with parents and traditional bullying perpetration was marginally significant ( b = 0.207, SE = 0.109, p = 0.058, AME = 0.126).

Healthy controls show a similar pattern, with marginally significant differences for all microbes (p = 0.058), differences in bacterial species abundance (p = 0.011), and no differences in viral species abundance.

For the mask defined of >90% intensity of the peak (comprising only 7.7 ± 9.6 mm 3 ), the correlation was marginally significant ( p = 0.058).