“marginally significant”

GERD was the only predictor of IPF, while ulcers and biomass exposure were the marginally significant factors (p=0.06) shown in Table-III .

Indeed, Wistar rats showed only a marginally significant decrease in BBB permeability from PND7 to PND20 (Tukey’s test: p = 0.06), whereas in OXYS rats, this parameter decreased from PND7 to PND14 significantly (Tukey’s test: p < 0.0002), and this decline continued during the third week of life (from PND14 to PND20; Tukey’s test: p < 0.04).

The main effect of group was marginally significant, indicating patients had blunted parent P3 waveform amplitudes relative to controls, F (1, 25) = 4.02, p = 0.06, η 2 p = 0.14.

The results found a marginally significant interaction effect between cerebral perfusion and ApoE4 carrier status on global cognition: VCAT(β=0.2286, p=0.060), and EM: RAVLT delayed (β=0.298, p=0.024), WAIS‐Logical Story (β=0.392, p=0.007).

Also, in the complete case analysis, the association between occasional tobacco use and lower participation was marginally significant ( P =.06).

In the SI condition, O showed no significant arm motion in the pre-MI period ( χ 2 (1) = 0.93, p = 0.33), and Y showed marginally significant ( χ 2 (1) = 3.54, p = 0.06) forward motion.

While the effect of baseline gait speed on subsequent mental intactness was slightly attenuated and became marginally significant (β=.030, 95% CI 0.002-0.061; P =.06), the reverse pathway still strongly held (β=.084, 95% CI 0.049-0.120; P <.001; Multimedia Appendix 2 ).

The effect of chemical concentration on hygienic removal was marginally significant at 4 h (F 2,10 = 3.68, p = 0.06) and statistically significant at 24 h (F 2,10 = 10.90, p = 0.003).

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

Post hoc comparisons showed that double word-color incongruency significantly slowed down target response only when the target was not a Stroop word (paired t(19) = −2.43, p = 0.02, marginally significant after correction), but not when it was a Stroop word (paired t(19) = −1.96, p = 0.06) (Fig. 2a, b ).

This relationship was marginally significant for those in racially homogeneous schools, r s (39) = .26, p = .06, but non-significant for those in racially heterogeneous schools, r s (29) = .16, p = .20.

The results remained significant when we controlled for variety-seeking tendencies ( F (1, 64) = 5.73, p = .02) and guesses about the number of other events taking place ( F (1, 65) = 5.51, p = .02), and only became marginally significant when controlling for feelings of regret ( F (1, 65) = 3.63, p = .06).

The results for BA show significant negative relationships with only T A and T WARMQ (after accounting for spatial autocorrelation), although ∑B was marginally significant ( p = 0.06).

Finally, the ANOVA revealed a marginally significant interaction between cue validity and SOA, F (1, 23) = 3.79, p = 0.06, reflecting the observation that at the 300 ms SOA cued targets ( M = 431 ms) were responded to faster than uncued targets ( M = 442 ms), but at the 1000 ms SOA, the trend was in the opposite direction, with slightly faster location of uncued targets ( M = 415 ms) than cued targets ( M = 418 ms).

The interaction between group and electrode was marginally significant ( F (48,1392) = 2.42, p = 0.06, η 2 = 0.08).

The estimated recurrence time for larger size of pterygium before surgery was short and marginally significant (17.14 ± 0.58 month in size of ≤3.0 mm versus. 18.56 ± 0.60 month in size of <3 mm; P= 0.06).

In female hippocampus, Pb exposure significantly decreased NDR1/2 expression at PND30 (control, 1.480±0.020; Pb exposure, 1.077±0.096, F(1,6) = 16.899, P<0.01, n = 8), PND90 (control, 1.541±0.035; Pb exposure, 1.215±0.080, F(1,6) = 14.000, P<0.01, n = 8), and induced marginally significant decrease at PND60 (control, 1.355±0.080; Pb exposure, 1.105±0.111, F(1,6) = 3.358, P = 0.06, n = 8) ( Fig 7C ).

Additionally, a trend towards lower birth weight was noted in the FAM group, although the disparity was marginally significant ( P = 0.06).

The mixed ANOVA performed on STD showed a marginally significant main effect of Congruency, F (1, 38) = 3.74, P = .06, but no main effect of Correspondence, F (1, 38) = .31, P > .5.

Moreover, a significant reduction in visceral fat ( p = 0.01) and a marginally significant decrease in BMI ( p = 0.06) were observed in the DASH group compared to the control group after adjusting for potential confounders.

Lower levels of blood lactate after aerobic exercise indicated an enhanced physical recovery, although the change was marginally significant in men (P = 0.06).

The correlation with rumination was marginally significant ( p = 0.06) suggesting that it would reach significance in a larger sample.

However, the effects of elevation on the assemblage composition were marginally significant in models containing number of trees (P = 0.06) and soil clay content (P = 0.07) as independent variables.

After removing the two outliers with FAST scores above 4, the correlation remained significant for GFAP ( r = 0.40, p = 0.009) and was marginally significant for ptau-181 ( r = 0.31, p = 0.06).

For the middle vMMN (150–300 ms), the interaction of Expression × ROI was marginally significant ( F (1,34) = 4.6, p = 0.06, η 2 = 0.13), whereby the occipito-temporal areas had more negative vMMN than the frontal areas in the happy condition ( p < 0.01).