“marginally significant”

Terms were considered significant if P < 0.05 and marginally significant if P < 0.1.

After logistic regression, 3 “true or false”-response questions related to history of depression in self and family history appeared marginally significant (logistic regression, FDR-corrected p < 0.1), with a self-reported “true” response to a “family history of depression” showing a marginal association with constipation (logistic regression, FDR-corrected <0.1), a self-reported “true” response to a “sibling history of depression” showing a significant association with diarrhea (logistic regression, FDR-corrected <0.05), and a self-reported “true” response to “recent ailments in self-history of depression” showing a marginal association with low-normal BMF (logistic regression, FDR-corrected <0.1).

Furthermore, there was a marginally significant negative effect of soil from heterospecifics vs. conspecifics on the survival of Prunus serotina seedlings (GLMM, F 1,53 = 2.77, P = 0.10; Fig. 1 ), and other species were unaffected (H1)( P ≥0.40).

However, only species richness ( F = 2.54, p <0.05) showed a marginally significant decrease from July to December whereas species diversity showed no change with season ( F = 2.08, p >0.10).

Rates of guns reported lost or stolen emerge as either significantly positively associated ( p < 0.05; model 2) or marginally significant ( p < 0.10; model 5) with the outcomes in two of the six models, but they certainly drop out when relying on more stringent alpha levels of 0.01 or 0.001.

When we repeated the test only considering GC contents within 10 nucleotides of recombination break points (20-nt window in Table 4 ), the significant associations between break-point positions and lower GC content in Sarbecoviruses and Pedacoviruses were strengthened, and additionally, marginally significant associations with lower GC contents (0.05 < P < 0.1; permutation test) were detected in Merbecoviruses and Embecoviruses ( Fig. 3 , Supplementary Fig.

Results were considered significant with P ≤ 0.05 and were considered marginally significant with P ≤ 0.10.

The mental health benefits of suburban green spaces became evident, showing marginally significant depression-reducing effects among the older adults ( B = −0.113, p < 0.1), groups with medium economic status ( B = −0.101, p < 0.05), and those with lower education levels ( B = −0.073, p < 0.1).

All results were considered significant with P ≤ 0.05 and marginally significant with P ≤ 0.10.

A marginally significant relationship (p≤0.1) was found between high stress at work and sICAM-1 (9% higher levels), and this relationship was unchanged by the addition of health behaviors ( Table 2 ).

Subsequently, multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed by adjusting for factors that showed a marginally significant association ( p < 0.1) in the univariate analysis.

Temperature z-score has a small positive effect, 0.08 ( p < .05), and precipitation z-score has a positive and marginally significant effect, 0.14 ( p < .10), on the log of the expected count of the ideal number of children.

An a priori significance threshold of α = .05 was used but marginally significant effects ( p < .10) are also reported.

Factors that were independently associated in the univariate analysis, being at least marginally significant (P ≤ 0.1), were included using a backward step-wise strategy.

Of the 30 interaction terms we tested, five reached the level of statistical significance (P < 0.05) with an additional three marginally significant (P < 0.10) ( Table 2 ).

Finally, there was a marginally significant relationship between thermal cutaneous thermal pain threshold challenge and μOR BP ND in the right amygdala (β = 0.3, 95%CI = (-0.07,0.68), P-value = 0.1) ( Fig. 2 D).

As we had a specific hypothesis about the direction of the exercise effect, differences between groups were further analyzed with planned contrasts or a linear trend analysis whenever the main effect of Group or the Group × Time interaction was at least marginally significant ( p < 0.1).

Then, using any factors that were marginally significant ( p < 0.1), we built MANOVA models, using gender, amount of debt, or prior urology clerkship as the explanatory variables.

Model selection was based on F-tests, and we used backward deletion conserving marginally significant ( P < 0.1) variables.

Marginally significant results (i.e., .05 < p < .10) were coded as significant, not null, for this purpose.

Results were considered significant at P ≤ 0.05 and marginally significant at 0.05 < P ≤ 0.10.

However, the response rate did not vary significantly between demographic variables (e.g., age, sex, occupation, marital status), place of residence, smoking and alcohol history at the residence, or clinical characteristics, except that the rTMS protocol used had some marginally significant ( p -value < 0.10) effect on the response rate.

Although it was not significant at alpha = 0.05 for Hispanic children speaking Spanish, the association between the social environment and physical activity was marginally significant and positive for Hispanic children speaking Spanish in comparison to non-Hispanic White children (b = 0.92, p < 0.10).

While most of the interaction terms in Model 4 were not statistically significant, their presence in the model rendered the beta for days of rationing marginally significant ( p <0.10) and proportion of vegetated land cover statistically significant ( p <0.01), thus lending initial, though weak, support to hypothesis 2 that increased rationing was associated with increased sachet use.

This effect was however marginally significant among boys ( p <0.1).