Barely Significant
← all phrases

“marginally significant”

26,083 sentences · 26,083 papers · 36,483 search hits before verification · confirmed specimen

Sighted at

p>=0.1

Listed by Hankins (2013) · Otte et al. (2022)

In the literature

marginally significantp = 0.061.2× alphagold
A significant difference in hydration increment was noted between both groups at Week 4, with the CPM‐HA20G treated side demonstrating an average hydration increment of 12.3% (95% CI 1.3–23.2, p = 0.029); there was also a marginally significant difference between the two groups at week 32, where the average hydration increment of the CPM‐HA20G treated side was 10.7% (95% CI −0.4 to 21.8, p = 0.06) higher than that of the CPM‐HA20 treated side, as shown in Figure 4 . 3.4.
marginally significantp < .061.2× alphagold
follow-up, t (9) = 2.355, p < 0.05, d = 0.78 (see Table 3 ).There was a marginally significant main effect of Session for coefficient of variation of SART response times at baseline vs. follow-up, F (1,15) = 4.279, p < .06, η p 2 = 0.222 , that was accounted for by the GMT group, t (9) = 2.410, p < 0.04, d = 0.993 (see Table 3 ; Figure 1 , top right).
marginally significantp = 0.061.2× alphagold
In addition, the interaction between priming type and experiments reached significance, F (1,96) = 5.72, MSE = 20401, p < 0.05, η 2 = 0.06, and the three-way interaction was marginally significant, F (3,96) = 2.53, MSE = 9013, p = 0.06, η 2 = 0.07, whereas other interactions were missing [Experiment ∗ SOAs: F < 1, ns; Congruency ∗ SOAs: F (3,96) = 1.41, MSE = 12277, p > 0.10].
marginally significantp = .061.2× alphagold
There was some evidence that grazer utilization may increase the percentage bare ground in tufted attractor‐dominated sites: the best model included only a positive and marginally significant effect of dung abundance on percentage bare ground ( F 1,13 = 4.312, p = .06; Figure 5 ; Table S7 ); however, the simpler intercept only model received similar support (ΔAICc = 1.115). 4.
marginally significantp = 0.061.2× alphagold
Subsequently, we found positive correlations between ICD and apoptosis (PCC = 0.55, β = 0.43, p = 0.03), ICD and necroptosis (PCC = 0.74, β = 0.78, p = 0.002), and apoptosis and necroptosis (PCC = 0.83, β = 1.11, p = 0.0001) within the ARVC myocardium, whereas the correlation between ICD and pyroptosis was marginally significant (PCC = 0.49, β = 0.86, p = 0.06) ( Supplementary Figure S2 ). 3.3.
marginally significantp = 0.061.2× alphagold
Correlations Between Disease Activity, Medications, and Markers of Intestinal Permeability Serum zonulin did not correlate with FCP, PMS, or IBD-related medications ( Supplementary Table S1 ), whereas there was a positive correlation between LBP and PMS (r = 0.40, p = 0.03), intake of antibiotics (r = 0.52, p = 0.00), anti-TNF medications (r = 0.42, p = 0.02), and a marginally significant trend for FCP (r = 0.31, p = 0.06) ( Figure 1 B). 5.
marginally significantP = .061.2× alphagold
Antibody Concentration and Time to Infection Among cases, there was a low negative correlation between pre-F IgG concentration in breast milk at 1 month postpartum and time to RSV ARI in cases, which is marginally significant (ρ = –0.22; P = .06), indicating that higher antibody levels may be associated with shorter time to infection.