“marginally significant”

However, there was a marginally significant difference in the number of boys and girls: 90% (9/10) of children in the ADHD group were boys, compared with 55% (11/20) in the control group ( P =.06).

The contrast comparing 2021 with 2022/2023 (K1) was marginally significant (b = 0.08, p = 0.060), suggesting that caregivers in 2021 reported slightly higher levels of perceived worsening of burden than caregivers in 2022 or 2023.

The results showed that there was a marginally significant interaction between regulatory focus and emotion in regard to the behavior of water-saving information dissemination ( F (1,56) = 3.62, p = 0.06)).

1 ) and marginally significant for the internal artery (−0.037 mm; P = 0.06).

Importantly, for both target-stimuli the number of trials correct at each duration was not significantly different from chance-level (12 correct; p ’s>.22), except for a marginally significant difference for bodies presented at a duration of 14 ms ( p = .06).

A marginally significant main effect of tDCS condition was found on overall RTs at recognition ( F (2,20) = 3.2, P = 0.06, η p 2 = 0.24), but not of stimulus familiarity ( F (1,10) = 1.5, P >0.1, η p 2 = 0.13) or interaction ( F (2,20) = 0.64, P >0.1, η p 2 = 0.06).

Nevertheless, after controlling the effect of the covariates, the interaction between group membership and the change in the percentage of CD 4 cells/mm 3 during the follow-up year was marginally significant ( F (1, 209) = 3.56, p = 0.060) (Fig. 3 ).

The intercept was marginally significant ( β ± SE : 0.65 ± 0.35, P = 0.06).

The difference between the dyslexia and dysgraphia groups was marginally significant (p=.06) on RD in left corticospinal, but not significant on RD in left superior longitudinal fasciculus.

Children with early complications experienced a marginally significant 6-point drop in global HRQL from baseline to 45 days ( β = -6.4, SE = 3.4, p = .06).

A multivariate regression analysis was performed that demonstrated that minor victimization did not have a positive association with depression in women ( β = −0.05, SE = 0.40, p = 0.91), while major victimization on the other hand, had a marginally significant association ( β = 1.00, SE = 0.54, p = 0.06).

Also similar to men, the gap between whites and U.S.-born Hispanics converges, although the one-year difference for women born in the 1980s remains marginally significant (p = 0.06).

However, the FE model showed a marginally significant negative association between the number of distinct medication types and FPG levels (−0.027, 95% CI: −0.055 to 0.001, p=0.060).

However, overall connectivity between mFus and STS was less than mFus to other areas, significant in ITS/MOG ( t -test, t = 2.31, p = 0.04, one-tailed) and marginally significant in IOG ( t = 2.16, p = 0.06, one-tailed), but not significant in aIT ( t = 1.48, p = 0.11, one-tailed).

Planned comparisons revealed significant differences between standards and deviants in the frontal ( p < 0.001) and central parietal montages ( p < 0.001), but only a marginally significant difference in the left temporal montage ( p = 0.06).

The regression model for the rVLPFC activity was marginally significant, R 2 = 0.37, F (5, 21) = 2.51, P = 0.06.

Considering the marginally significant interaction ( p = 0.06) and the exploratory nature of investigating bystanders’ roles in prosocial intervention, we conducted a comparison examining the condition effects within each task type.

There was a marginally significant interaction, F(1, 183) = 3.52, p = 0.06, d = 0.28.

None of the adverse events reported by patients (N = 65) was influenced by the patients’ CYP1A2 expression (P > 0.1), and CYP3A4 expression had a marginally significant effect on constipation [47.1% in normal/high CYP3A4 expressers, 71.4% in low CYP3A4 expressers, OR = 3.6 (95%CL = 0.9–14.1), Wald ChiSq = 3.4, N = 65, P = 0.06] (Table 3 ), indicating that patients expressing CYP3A4 at low level tended to report constipation more frequently.

There was also a marginally significant interaction between age (6, 12 months) and stimulus (face, object); F (1,47) = 3.71, p = 0.06, η 2 = 0.073) such that there were longer peak looks to faces than objects at 6 months but not 12 months (6 months face M 20.46, SE 2.92; object M 14.87, SE 1.78; 12 months face M 14.23, SE 1.41; object M 14.77, SE = 1.04).

More interestingly, the Proposed solution x Group interaction was marginally significant [ F (1.32) = 3.69, p = 0.06, η p 2 = 0 . 10 ].

α- and β-Diversity in Each Obesity Phenotype Healthy individuals had higher microbial α-diversity based on the Shannon index compared to the MHO and MUO phenotypes, and the difference was marginally significant ( p = 0.06) ( Figure 1 ).

The main effect of agent type was marginally significant, F (1, 232) = 3.58, p = 0.060, η p 2 = 0.015; specifically, participants rated it less permissible in the AI agent condition ( M = 48.49, SD = 2.05, 95% CI [44.45, 52.52]) than those in the human agent condition ( M = 53.93, SD = 2.02, 95% CI [49.96, 57.90]).

There was a marginally significant difference between positive and negative language contexts ( p = 0.060).

Time from PCa diagnosis to MDT was marginally significant ( p = 0.06) with a hazard ratio of 0.99.