Barely Significant
← all phrases

“marginally significant”

26,083 sentences · 26,083 papers · 36,483 search hits before verification · confirmed specimen

Sighted at

p>=0.1

Listed by Hankins (2013) · Otte et al. (2022)

In the literature

marginally significantp = 0.0481.0× alphagold
When FSH was treated as a continuous variable, a marginally significant inverse association was observed in the unadjusted model (OR: 0.994, 95% CI: 0.989–0.999; p = 0.048), though this association was not maintained after full adjustment (fully adjusted OR: 0.995, 95% CI: 0.989–1.001; p = 0.46) (Table 2 ). 3.2 Association Between Baseline FSH Levels and Incidence of HTN and Elevated BP For elevated BP, a total of 134 elevated BP cases, who were free of outcome at baseline, were documented over 2034 person‐years of follow‐up.
marginally significantp = 0.0481.0× alphagold
Concerning FFM, just old rats in the ST25 group had a larger – tough marginally significant – percent increase from baseline compared with the old ST12 group (diet effect, same age, p = 0.048), and also tended to have a greater increase of FFM than adult ST25 rats (age effect, same diet, p = 0.061), see Figure 1E .
marginally significantp = 0.0481.0× alphagold
The iPE model identified significant main effects of sex ( p = 0.002) and a significant sex × age interaction ( p = 0.014), along with a marginally significant level × exposure interaction ( p = 0.048), division × level × age ( p = 0.002) and division × level × exposure ( p = 0.028).
marginally significantp = 0.0481.0× alphagold
Fitting the interaction between 7PS and dataset generated a marginal improvement in the model (Chisq = 10.905, p = 0.02352, df = 3), with the interaction 7PS* 35SNP_historical_cats being marginally significant (est = 0.228 ± 0.11, t = 2.00, p = 0.048).
marginally significantP = 0 0.0481.0× alphagold
Also a highly significant effect of time on participant’s weight (F (2, 68) = 36.32, P < 0 0.01, ηp 2 = 0.51)was shown and a marginally significant within group effect of supplementation on participant’s weight (F (2, 68) = 3.180, P = 0 0.048, ηp 2 = 0.086).
marginally significantp = 0.04831.0× alphagold
In unadjusted model 1, none of the cognitive domain Z scores were significantly associated with baseline patterns of multimorbidity in diabetes patients, while the “multisystem morbidity” class had a marginally significant association with decline in global cognitive Z scores ( β = −0.169, 95% CI = −0.326, −0.012, p = 0.0483).
marginally significantp = .04831.0× alphagold
Whilst the overall model predicting LEAS scores was marginally significant ( R 2 = .03, F (2, 296) = 2.66, p = .0483), the relationship between autistic traits and LEAS scores was not (path a: b = .12, p = .296); there was instead a main effect of sex where female participants tended to outperform males ( b = 2.66, p = .0328), though no significant moderation.