“marginally significant”

Indeed, we examined the correlation analysis between cycling performance (i.e., mean and peak power in 10-second sprint cycling) and urinary 8-OHdG, and we found that the relationships between these exercise performances and the oxidative damage were marginally significant, respectively (mean power: r = –0.44, P = 0.09; peak power: r = –0.49, P = 0.06).

Results Pre-registered analysis To address our pre-registered hypothesis ( https://osf.io/ht3yn ), we conducted a chi-square test and found a marginally significant difference in attendance rate between the two conditions [ X 2 (1,263) = 2.86, p = .09].

In the analysis of continuous CES-D scores, the ORs for unadjusted and adjusted models were significant for men and women, except for model 2 among women, which was marginally significant ( p =0.09) ( Table 4 ).

The eyes in this group exhibited some typical glaucoma-like features, such as marginally significant higher IOP (18.7 vs. 16.4 mm Hg, P = 0.09), enlarged cupping (0.62 vs. 0.52, P = 0.03), and RNFL wedge defects as seen on fundus pictures; however, these features were not considered for inclusion in the study or control group but rather observational outcomes.

In partial support of H5, when punishment was the outcome variable, the overall model was marginally significant, R 2 = .20, F (2,32) = 2.60, p = .09.

Three compounds were also marginally significant, including bornyl acetate ( P = 0.09) and the monoterpenes camphene ( P = 0.09) and myrcene ( P = 0.06).

The moderating effect of gender on the relationship between mindfulness and cognitive reappraisal was marginally significant ( b = −0.02, p = 0.09).

16 Our index systematic review demonstrated a higher rate of return to sport in patients with biceps tenodesis (72.6%) compared to SLAP repair (59.2%), with a marginally significant increase in the likelihood of return to sport after biceps tenodesis (OR, 1.85 [95% CI, 0.91-3.85]; P = .09). 25 Rates of return to play among baseball pitchers are extremely variable and cited to range from 22% to 64% after SLAP repair, with notably detrimental changes in pitching biomechanics

Repeated measures ANOVA with factors of electrode (C3 and C4), condition (control, learned, and transposed songs), and frequency (theta, mu, beta, and gamma) revealed a main effect of frequency ( F (3,13) = 2988.37, p = 1.0 e − 3) and a marginally significant interaction between frequency and electrode ( F (3,13) = 2.65, p = 0.09).

The correlation at T1 was marginally significant (r(185) = −.12, p = .09), as was the correlation between perceived typicality of monthly expenses and expense predictions for the month (r(185) = −.12, p = .09).

The main effect of group was marginally significant ( F (1,32) = 3.06 P = 0.09, partial η 2 = 0.09).

Furthermore, trees from the white sand forest had marginally significant (p = 0.09) slower leaf traits compared to trees from the river terrace, and this relationship was more evident (p = 0.04) in isoprene non-emitters.

Also, while treatment with glucose didn’t have a significant effect on glucose levels in wild-type crickets (t30 = − 1.04, P = 0.309), it caused a marginally significant increase in glucose levels of mutant crickets (t30 = 1.75, P = 0.090).

However, the age distribution of accurately diagnosed obese children differed significantly across age categories ( p = 0.002), and a marginally significant difference in age distribution was observed for children accurately diagnosed with FTT ( p = 0.09).

For the key adverb contrast, a repeated-measures ANOVA with the parameters outlined above revealed a marginally significant interaction between the two factors ( F (21) = 3.05, p = 0.09) that actually trended in the opposite direction from that predicted (i.e., more negative for the control than for the subordinating condition at anterior electrodes).

Repeated-measures ANOVA yielded a marginally significant main effect of Group (F(1,32) = 2.9; p = 0.09, η p 2 = 0.09) and significant main effects of Statement (F(1,32) = 34.4; p<0.0001, η p 2 = 0.51) and Occupation (F(1,32) = 22.6; p <0.0001, η p 2 = 0.41).

The marginally significant group effect (F(2, 27) = 2.6, p = 0.09) was due to a reduced pre-stimulus alpha activity in the cc compared to the mc group (t(22) = 2.7, p < 0.01; one-tailed) and the dc group (t(16) = 1.9, p < 0.04; one-tailed; Fig. 2d ).

For both the daily difference score and recall after one day models, there was a marginally significant difference between the overall in-vivo score model compared to the individual drink in-vivo scores model ( p = 0.09).

The main effect of gender was not significant, F (1, 73) = 1.87, p = 0.18, η 2 p = 0.03; however, the interaction between gender and age was marginally significant, F (3, 77) = 2.25, p = 0.09, η 2 p = 0.09.

35 reported a marginally significant ( p = 0.09) increase in rate of tau accumulation associated with a 4 year decrease in CR‐EA in a cognitively impaired sample, but not a cognitively normal sample from the Mayo Clinic cohort.

Post hoc analyses showed that children in the low grade responded more slowly than the children in middle and high grades (ps < 0.05), and children from the middle grade exhibited longer reaction times than the ones in the high grades (p = 0.09, marginally significant).

In addition, the mTBI group showed a marginally significant trend toward lower SIRT1 levels than the than the control (p = 0.090) and KD (p = 0.077) groups.

For the estimated threshold and slope for the fitted logistic function across the blocks, we only found a marginally significant negative correlation with AQ characteristics in block 1 for the slope values ( r =-0.19, p = 0.09).

The interaction effect between leadership support and team size reveals that the association between change in leadership support and work satisfaction is positive and significant for small-sized teams (effect size = 0.53, SE = 0.20, p = 0.01, CI low = 0.12; CI high = 0.93), it is positive but not significant for average-sized teams (effect size = 0.11, SE = 0.14, p = 0.47, CI low = −0.19; CI high = 0.40), and it is negative and marginally significant for large teams (effect size = −0.32, SE = 0.18, p = 0.09, CI low = −0.69; CI high 0.06; see also the slopes depicted in Figure 3 ).

For negative affect, the three-way interaction between MS, MF and self-control was marginally significant ( β = 0.04, p = 0.09).