“nominally significant”

Furthermore, when examining CpG sites that were nominally significant (i.e., non-FDR-corrected p-value < 0.001) (n = 3612), we observed overlapping associations between individual PFAS and DNA methylation at 282 specific CpG sites.

We found a nominally significant gene-level association for CHRNB3 (gene P = 0.001; Supplementary Data 4 ).

These two index SNPs also showed nominally significant associations in both Huoshenshan and Union cohorts (all P < 0.001; Table 2 ).

This association was identified from the results of the variant rs299290 (T > C; minor allele frequency = 0.25), which was not significant at the genome-wide level, but nominally significant in two study phases 12 , 14 , 19 (combined log-relative risk effect = 0.044, p = 0.001).

Wake after sleep onset (WASO) declined significantly in response to the 400-mg dose relative to placebo (mean treatment effect –54 min; P < 0.001), and dose-related, clinically relevant, and nominally significant improvements were observed after almorexant doses of 200 ( P < 0.001) and 100 mg ( P = 0.004) ( Figure 1c ).

SNV/INDEL association analysis Fisher’s exact test identified 4594 (5743), 5019 (6063), and 5066 (5959) autosomal (total numbers in parentheses) nominally significant ( p ≤ 1 × 10 −3 ) genetic variants (SNVs/INDELs) for neutropenia, leukopenia, and thrombocytopenia, respectively.

Of the nominally significant proteins (Figure S9 in supporting information), several cytokines and immune‐related proteins (interleukin [IL]‐6, logFC = –0.668, P = 0.001; tumor necrosis factor [TNF], logFC = –0.299, P = 0.017; C‐reactive protein [CRP], logFC = –0.45, P = 0.018; IL‐15, logFC = –0.23, P = 0.027; IL‐9, logFC = 0.54, P = 0.49), amyloid peptides (Aβ38, logFC = –0.45, P = 0.004; Aβ42, logFC = –0.43, P = 0.011) and proteins implicated in synucleinopathies (PARK7, logFC = –0.912, P = 0.027; FABP3, logFC = –0.370, P = 0.036) were downregulated.

Among the 49 patients in the intervention group and 51 in the control group undergoing postoperative chemotherapy, a nominally significant improvement in the change from baseline in the EORTC-QLQ-C30 total score at 3 months was observed compared to the control group (difference of 4.42; P <.001).

The differences between MK-8189 16 and 24 mg versus risperidone (−8.5 kg, and −7.3 kg, respectively) were nominally significant ( P <0.001).

In relation to why previous GWA studies have not previously identified ABCC5 as a T2D susceptibility gene, it is worth noting that while individual nominally significant SNP p-values nearest to the estimated ABCC5 variant location at 185,136 kb for the WTCCC (e.g. rs3749441, P = 1E−03), NIDDK (e.g. rs1016752, P = 0.04) and TwinsUK samples (e.g. rs8180093, P = 0.002) do not pass genome-wide significance ( α = 1E−05), when all the SNPs in the region are considered collectively as part of a multilocus model, they do provide strong evidence of association with T2D and insulin resistance (meta-analysis P = 3E−07).

The analysis utilized nominally significant SNPs ( p < 0.001) for the four brain regions showing FDR-significant results (right lateral ventricle, right caudate, right pallidum, and right accumbens).

The A allele exerted a nominally significant effect on each PAL variable in the model (PAL memory: F =15.159; P <0.001; PAL errors: F =9.350; P =0.003; PAL required trials: F =8.546; P =0.004).

Gene ontology (GO) enrichment analysis identified 128 nominally significant enriched terms (see Table S3 for genes included in the analysis) for the DMPs ( P < 0.001) identified in the age 10 analysis, including several related to the etiology of psychosis, such as glutamatergic synaptic transmission (GO:0051966, P = 0.0034) and neuron projection development (GO:0031175, P = 0.0064).

3.2.1 COPD We identified a nominally statistical association between CHRNA3 rs1051730 and COPD risk under the allelic and dominant models in all populations (allelic model: OR = 1.630, 95% CI = 1.293–2.054, p < 0.001; dominant model: OR = 1.662, 95% CI = 1.300–2.124, p < 0.001), a nominally significant association under the allelic and dominant models in Asians (allelic model: OR = 1.591, 95% CI = 1.204–2.103, p = 0.001; dominant model: OR = 1.625, 95% CI = 1.222–2.160, p = 0.001), and a null association under all three models in Caucasians.

Although a Kruskal–Wallis test detected nominally significant inter-phenotype differences in age ( p = 0.001), this significance did not survive correction for multiple testing (e.g., using FDR adjustment).

At a nominally significant threshold of p-value ≤ 0.001, GWAS analysis discovered 148 MTAs, pointing to 54 QTLs for the coefficient of infection and 179 MTAs for agronomic traits.

These differences are nominally significant in comparisons between children homozygous for the risk allele and the rest of the sample (p values = 0.001 – 0.028).

Overall, 1711 of the 485,577 probes on the array were nominally significant at the p < 0.001 level in the heavy vs abstinent group comparison (expected value; 486 probes at p < 0.001).

While not all previously known DR variants were identified at genome-wide significance in our analyses, we observed an excess of nominally significant associations at these loci (p<0.001, Table B in S1 File ).

Using HOMER’s default parameters, the final number of nominally significant ( p value ≤ 0.001) interactions was 41,833 for the healthy dataset and 357,749 for the PANC-1 dataset.

Nearly, all pairwise comparisons of the MFIQ UA, PF, SF, and EF scores and the global UA item with the conceptually similar migraine interference level were nominally significant ( P < .001).

Of relevance to IBD, the GTEx database also includes a nominally significant eQTL ( p <10 −3 ) with the same direction of effect in sigmoid colon.

We used the Z > 3 cut-off for each comparison, representing nominally significant p<0.001 (see Figure 5 and Table Z4 in Zenodo).

A meta-analysis of BP GWAS in samples that overlap with those in the present study found suggestive signals 6 ; the most significant SNP in that study was nominally significant in the present study (rs1042779; p=0.001).

These loci with nominally significant top SNPs or its adjacent SNPs passed the arbitrary prioritization threshold of P < 0.001 in any of these long COVID GWASs were treated as potential candidate loci for long COVID.