“marginally significant”

There was a marginally significant effect of species in that orangutans performed slightly better than chimpanzees ( p =.046), but the full-null model comparison was not significant (likelihood ratio test full-null model comparison: X 2 = 4.69, df = 2, p =.096).

Once covariates were added to educational attainment, the initial block of covariates was significant ( p < 0.001), as was the block for skills at 24 months ( p = 0.046; for skills at 54 months the block was marginally significant).

For the period from March 2019 to March 2020, there was a marginally significant linear trend in proportion of donations to charity, F (1, 51) = 4.20, p = 0.046, but inspection of the plot revealed that this was probably a spurious effect due to the presence of a peak caused by a charity campaign in March.

The ANOVA showed a marginally significant three-way interaction of surprisal by repetition by group effect ( p = 0.046, η p 2 = 0.82).

We observed a marginally significant between-group effect on the emotion recognition FU scores ( F = 4.45, p = 0.046), while controlling for T0 performance ( F = 4.08, p = 0.055).

Notably, in both testis and ovary, we found little effect of replication timing on germline mutation rates, other than a marginally significant negative effect for mutations other than CpG Ti ( P = 0.046, using testis expression data).

Current SGA use was a marginally significant covariate of Y v ( F = 4.06, p = 0.046 ) but not CBF or CMRO 2 .

We observed a marginally significant between groups effect on social cognition FU scores ( F [1,25] = 4.45, P = 0.046), while controlling for T0 performance ( F [1,25] = 4.08, P = 0.055).

In contrast, the PSM-DID estimate for the overall treatment effect ( did ) is smaller and marginally significant ( coefficient = −0.019, p = 0.046), suggesting a more modest impact.

Sex-by-education interaction was marginally significant (p = 0.046).

Footnotes 1 Exploratory correlation analyses did reveal a marginally significant positive association between CATI-Communication subscale scores and ‘Give’ frequencies in the Retro gaze condition only (described below; r = .17; p = .046; uncorrected for multiple comparisons).

ARID5B variants (rs2588969 and rs494288) showed marginally significant association with LOAD in meta-analysis of 2,634 LOAD and 4,201 controls ( P = 0.046 and 0.008, respectively), although the associations did not survive adjustment for covariates ( P = 0.30 and 0.11, respectively).[ 19 ] Other inconclusive association of ARID5B variants included Naj et al.

In contrast to ovary mass differences, body masses were comparatively stable, with only small magnitude and marginally significant differences identified (Kruskal–Wallis test to enable comparisons with ovary mass results: χ 2 = 6.2, p = 0.046; or one-way ANOVA, as the data do meet the assumptions: F = 3.4, p = 0.043).

Twelve studies including 1,178 patients assessed the incidence of thromboembolic events, and more events were found in the AA group; however, the results were marginally significant (RR 1.47, 95% CI 1.01–2.15, P = 0.046).

However, gender appeared marginally significant only in the left UNC FA with male having higher levels than females (β = 0.32, p = 0.046).

However, regarding depressive symptomatology, the Vuong test did not yield conclusive results, showing a marginally significant variance test ( p = 0.046, indicating that the two models were distinguishable from each other) but no preference between the model with or without the BDI score as a predictor of sexual desire (both alternative hypotheses with p > 0.05).

Moreover, there was a marginally significant difference in the EQ-5D utility score [χ2 (2) = 7.988, p = 0.046] across the various monthly income levels.

The difference in the median 5-year DFS in the Her2+ cohort was marginally significant (57.23 months 95% CI [53.86–60.60] in the TM group vs 43.41 months 95% CI [34.19–52.64] in the IR group; P = 0.046; Fig. 5 D).

Likewise, all the pairwise comparisons between Management Areas were non-significant for all year classes analysed with the only exception of EB-EW in 2010 being marginally significant at R ST = 0.024 ( P = 0.046) but not after Bonferroni correction ( P = 0.0017).

There were also two marginally significant main effects in R. rattus ; mean helminth species richness was lower at Bangsar compared with Chow Kit (Table 5 , F 1, 336 = 4.03, P = 0.046), and increased with age, but then leveled off in age class 3 ( F 1, 336 = 3.23, P = 0.041, values in age classes 1-3, = 1.18 ± 0.145, 1.69 ± 0.092, 1.53 ± 0.087, respectively).

Although the initial linear coefficient was marginally significant ( p = 0.046), the overall response surface declined with dose, and the model identified 0 minutes as the optimal UV A+B exposure.

This latent dimension of physical robustness was associated with a specific brain pattern of CT and a specific brain pattern of GMV ( Fig 3 ), though the statistical comparison showed a marginally significant Spearman correlation indicating that they do share variance ( r = 0.41, p = 0.046).

At 6 months, the variation in average insulin dose was marginally significant ( p = 0.046) [ 30 ].

Generally speaking, the blocking of PBMCs infection by anti-TpUB05 antiserum was marginally significant ( p < 0.046) using Friedman test.

There was a marginally significant effect of noise on maximum distance (i.e., gesture size), χ 2 (2) = 6.16, p = 0.046.