“marginally significant”

Results The mean tibial torsion angle significantly decreased in both groups compared to preoperative values, with reductions of − 3.8° in the PT-HTO group and − 1.4° in the DT-HTO group, with a marginally significant difference between the groups ( p = 0.062).

Finally, there was a marginally significant interaction between Day and Word Type, F (1, 20) = 3.904, MSE = 3608.304, p = 0.062.

Sociability Perceptions of sociability were also influenced by a marginally significant trait by trait-score interaction, p = .062.

Considering the marginally significant interaction effect for body fat ( p = 0.062), there was a trend for a difference between women and men in the double standard for the average-weight body.

GRDP differences were marginally significant ( p = 0.062) ( Figure 2f ), while higher population density correlated with greater mortality risk ( p < 0.001) ( Figure 2g ).

Although the difference between two motivations among our screening questions yielded a marginally significant result ( p = 0.062) and could be seen as a limitation, conducting this experiment with a larger sample size in the future would alleviate this limitation.

A marginally significant increase over time was found for the subscale “positive affect” in this group (Z = −1.87, p = 0.062).

The centered interaction term using training regimen and session was added to the regression model and accounted for a marginally significant amount of variance in the correlation between fluid intelligence and training gain, ΔR 2 = .101, ΔF (1, 26) = 3.80, b = -.034, t (26) = -1.950, p = .062 (see Fig 5 ).

Our findings demonstrate that women aged 70 and older are 48.0% less likely to undergo surgery, although this observation was marginally significant (AOR: 0.52, [95% CI: 0.26–1.03], p = 0.062).

However, results revealed a marginally significant three-way interaction effect, F [1,187] = 3.53, p = 0.062, η η 2 = 0.02, favoring Hypothesis 2.

Stratification by race revealed a marginally significant interaction trend ( p = 0.062), with slightly larger effect sizes observed in non-Hispanic Blacks (OR = 0.956) and Hispanics/other races (OR = 0.959–0.986) compared to non-Hispanic Whites (OR = 0.966).

After model adjustment for baseline risk factors, the OR remained significant for type II DM (aOR: 2.16; CI: 1.18-3.94; P = 0.012), QRS > 120 (aOR: 2.18; CI: 1.02-4.66; P = 0.045) and marginally significant for supraventricular arrhythmias (aOR: 1.82; CI: 0.97-3.42; P = 0.062).

In separate analyses, this interaction effect was particularly significant in women ( P = 0.010), whereas its significance in patients with diabetes was marginally significant ( P = 0.062).

Notably, ‘routine treatment’ (23 trials) and ‘comfort group settings’ (27 trials) showed marginally significant trends (interaction p=0.062 and 0.076, respectively), suggesting these factors might contribute to between-study heterogeneity.

The same effect in the single expression condition was marginally significant, Ζ = −1.87, p = 0.062.

In contrast, hsa-miR-143-3p exhibited a similar significant suppression effect in 293T cells only (31%, P < 0.001), while the effect in HepG2 cells was marginally significant (14%, P = 0.062).

There was no significant main effect of stimulation [F(1, 19) = 2.165, p = 0.158; ɳ 2 = 0.102], but a main effect of session was marginally significant [F(1, 19) = 3.931, p = 0.062; ɳ 2 = 0.171], implying the presence of a slight practice effect.

Besides, a marginally significant effect was revealed for IL- 6 when trials had good (WMD: − 0.59 pg/mL; 95% CI: − 1.22 to 0.03; P = 0.062) and fair methodological quality (WMD: − 0.14 pg/mL; 95% CI: − 0.29 to 0.01; P = 0.060).

The interaction of response relation and distractor relation was marginally significant, F (1, 40) = 3.68, p =.062, η p 2 = 0.08, showing that when both the response and distractor repeated, less errors were made than when only one of them repeated.

A marginally significant enrichment for segmental duplications was also observed in 13q14.3 breakpoint regions (p=0.062).

The predicted interaction between the name prime manipulation and participant political identity on opinions of the president was marginally significant, F (2, 329) = 2.80, p = .062, partial eta-squared = .017.

Specifically: (1) after excluding missing covariates (Table S2): the association of “total WMH regression” with processing speed decline became marginally significant ( p = 0.062), as did “DWMH progression” with HV loss ( p = 0.061).

This is supported by a marginally significant RT advantage for black ratings, F (1, 23) = 3.85, p = 0.062, η p 2 = 0.14, suggesting that the participants dwelled slightly longer on the white faces.

The main effect of Word Length was marginally significant [ F (1, 22) = 3.88, p = 0.062].

The skin & blood clock provides marginally significant evidence (p=0.062) that fibroblasts from boys with classic HGPS are epigenetically older than those from girls with classic HGPS, but this gender effect is not apparent when classic and non-classic HGPS samples are pooled for analyses ( Supplementary Figure 10 ).