“marginally significant”

We also found marginally significant interaction in the second visit [ F (1,56) = 3.11, p corrected = 0.08, η 2 p = 0.05].

A marginally significant protective effect was observed in the 60–69 age group (unadjusted OR=0.62, 95% CI: 0.39–1.00, p = 0.050).

The training group (median=6.50) reported lower levels of perceived usefulness than the nontraining group (median=6.92) at the marginally significant level ( U =4.50, Z=−1.99, P =.05).

Orphanhood was marginally significant ( p = 0.05), with rates highest for those CA-HIV with no living parent compared to those who had at least one living parent (aOR = 11.03, p = 0.05).

Additionally, T2change in TMTBA exhibited a significant correlation with T2change in alpha1 ( r = 0.363, p = 0.023), and T6change in rumination showed a marginally significant correlation with T6change in alpha1 ( r = 0.330, p = 0.050).

Restaurant density’s correlation with obesity was marginally significant (OR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.85 to 1.00, p=0.05), yet the literature lacked sufficient data to evaluate the impact of restaurant proximity ( figure 2 ).

Analysis III based on a three level ordered outcome shows a marginally significant trend ( p = 0.05).

In addition, marginally significant differences were observed in the comparison between pig P1 and the other individuals (β = 3.68; p = 0.05). 3.2.

suzukii emergence between treated (7.9 ± 0.5 individuals) and control (9.4 ± 0.8 individuals) plots were marginally significant (t (4) = −2.721, p = 0.05), suggesting that control efficacy further decreased at this distance.

Marginally significant seasonal effect on fungal compositional pattern was also detected (R 2 = 0.06; p = 0.05), where the 95% confidence interval ellipses for autumn and winter were isolated, denoting distinct composition (Table 2 ; Fig. 3 a).

The results only showed a marginally significant effect of Salience [ F (1, 60) = 4.688, η 2 = .002, p = .05], attributable to participants being somewhat faster at selecting the more salient [ m = 193.5 ms] than the less salient singleton [ m = 211.9 ms].

The difference in position errors was, however, marginally significant ( p = 0.05), comparing e pTSO and e pfMO .

A subsequent comparison of the normalized mutant/wild-type ratios ( Figure 6D ) revealed a marginally significant difference (p<0.05) between P23K (0.37 ±0.10) and both D190N (0.64 ±0.18 SD) and P23Y (0.67 ±0.13 SD), but there were no significant differences in the GFP signal intensity between any of the other mutants.

Besides rs6697469, there were 2 additional SNPs showed marginally significant association signals with hip fractures, which were rs10917588 ( P = 0.050) and rs7553831 ( P = 0.058).

NASH showed a marginally significant association with a diastolic dysfunction compared to NAFL (31% vs. 6%, p=0.05).

1%; p = 0.001), and end-stage liver disease showed a marginally significant difference (7.5% vs. 2%; p = 0.050).

Mortality difference by site was marginally significant ( p =0.05; Figure 1 ).

When testing with a multiple linear regression model, we found that the association of the severity of AD (SCORAD index) and sensitisation (to common food and/or airborne allergens) remained significant ( p < 0.01), and the association with the history of impetigo was marginally significant ( p = 0.05).

The RiskScore was marginally significant ( P ≈ 0.05) between Grade 2 + 3 groups proving that the more advanced the stage is, the higher the RiskScore would be.

Yet, this effect was marginally significant ( p = .050).

On the other hand, the freeze-dried EVs led to a slight, marginally significant GSH increase (116% ± 5, p = 0.05), while the positive control N-acetycysteine (NAC) at 5 mM produced a robust response of 200% (±3, p < 0.0001), as expected.

Phytoplankton C:P ratios in ambient conditions (ambient nutrients, temperature and without grazers) were higher in the larger size fraction as compared to the smaller size fraction for the highest productivity system ( p < 0.05, Figure 4 a), and marginally significant for the lowest productivity system ( p = 0.05, Figure 4 a).

Among the cases with mortality, the GCS scores decreased from 8.29 ± 0.76 on the first day to 6.14 ± 2.97 on the last day, which is marginally significant (p = 0.05) in supratentorial stroke.

However, no clear associations were observed, except a marginally significant association between GRS4 and gross hematuria (p < 0.05).

There was also a marginally significant effect of Vignette pair, F (1, 39) = 4.07, p = .05; η partial 2 = .094, as people gave higher innateness ratings to the vignette pair concerning flying compared to those concerning singing.