Assessment of differentially methylated regions Nominally significant probes ( p ≤ 0.05; n = 24,149) were included in the differentially methylated region (DMR) analysis, identifying 123 DMRs ( q ≤ 0.05; Supplementary Table 5 ).
← all phrases
“nominally significant”
Sighted at
p=0.08
In the literature
In addition, a nominally significant difference was found for the neuroendocrine parameters stress CORT and increase in CORT as measured in the HPA-RT in males (p < 0.05), but not females.
Five of the 19 SNPs demonstrated a nominally significant association with neovascular AMD (P < 0.05), of which two (rs3173798 and rs3211883) withstood Bonferroni correction for multiple testing (rs3173798, nominal P = 9.96 × 10−4, allele-specific odds ratio = 0.55; rs3211883, nominal P = 2.09 × 10−4, allele-specific odds ratio = 0.50).
The IVW method is applicable when horizontal pleiotropy does not exist ( 28 ); If the results of the MR analysis are nominally significant ( P < 0.05), we consider a possible causal relationship between the exposure and the outcome ( 29 ).
Of the 12 haplotypes with P < 10 -6 in GS:SFHS, none were nominally significant ( P ≥ 0.05) in ELSA.
To underpin this, we further checked the directions of effect of all nominally significant a-DMSs ( P < 0.05) and found that methylation changes tended to be negatively associated with maternal smoking between 0 and 4/5 years (Fig. 4b ) and, moreover, that 721/971 (74.2%) a-DMSs showed a stronger decrease in methylation levels from 0 to 4/5 years (Additional file 1 : Table S7).
Combinations demonstrating nominally significant inter-group differences ( p < 0.05) were selected for further exploratory analyses (n = 25 for 3-antigen, n = 31 for 4-antigen, and n = 25 for 5-antigen combinations).
Nominally significant ( P < 0.05) associations with gout were detected at CARD8 rs2043211 (OR = 1.12, P = 0.007), IL1B rs1143623 (OR = 1.10, P = 0.020) and CD14 rs2569190 (OR = 1.08; P = 0.036) .
Result We observed the 29 proteins with nominally significant associations ( p <0.05) with at least one domain‐specific cognitive scores (best P with C1r and executive function: p = 1.45x10 ‐11 ).
For all nominally significant associations ( p < 0.05), effect sizes were strongly correlated when using imputed vs.
However, identified correlations were only nominally significant without multiple testing correction ( P < 0.05; Supplementary Table 27 ).
Metabolomic analyses Positive ion metabolites that were identified as nominally significant (p≤0.05) in SAMS patients are shown in S5 Table of S3 File .
After sensitivity analysis and FDR correction, the following results were obtained: Two-sample MR analyses using various brain-related omics datasets and ADs revealed that in the CSF metabolites-ADs analysis, several diseases exhibited nominally significant causal relationships ( P < .05) in the initial analysis.
Under the assumption that the gap statistic follows a standard normal distribution, approximate p-values for all three analyses were nominally significant (p < 0.05), with the blood and dura analysis resulting in the most significant gap statistics (p < 1×10 -10 ).
Nominally significant association (P<0.05) was observed for markers in: TCF7L2, RBMS1, CDKAL1, ZNF239, KCNQ1 and TCF1 and a significant bias (P<0.05) towards OR>1 was observed for markers selected from previous T2D genome-wide association studies, consistent with a role for Old World variants in susceptibility to T2D in Latin Americans.
Of the 13 assayed proteins, only 3 showed nominally significant difference (p<0.05) after the swimming experiment (CCL11, and CXCL10 lower and IL-1ra, higher).
On the other hand, limitations of the current study that may reduce the generalizability of the results include retrospective self-report of the main exposure of interest, a relatively small sample size, lack of replication in an independent cohort, the balance of biological sex within the cohort, the cohort enrichment of higher SES and FEH participants, the inability to correct for smoking-related effects, and the interpretation of nominally significant ( p < 0.05) results instead of more rigorous multiple hypothesis testing corrected results.
Both nominally significant alterations ( p < 0.05) and those surviving multiple testing correction (FDR < 0.05) were reported; however, only FDR-significant findings were interpreted as robust.
Traits were shown in the figure if Wald ratio or MR-IVW or MR-Weighted-Median showed nominally significant (P<0.05) results.
All CC lead signals were at least nominally significant ( P < 0.05) in cervical dysplasia analysis, rs4849177 and rs35508382 were also genome-wide significant ( Supplementary Material, Table S7 ), confirming the overlap of genetic risk factors for cervical dysplasia and cancer.
The IVW analyses identified 5 circulating inflammatory proteins with nominally significant ( P < .05) causal associations with ADHD.
In order to eliminate effect of these confounding parameters we residualized our phenotypes using backward multiple regression model (lme function in nlme R package): starting from all variables included into the model we step by step eliminated less significant ones until all variables were nominally significant (p<0.05).
Nominally significant p values ( p ≤ .05) are reported.
All loci identified at discovery were at least nominally significant ( P < 0.05) at replication, except for the locus near PCDH7 , and all were directionally consistent.
Nearly all individual loci remained nominally significant ( p < 0.05) with similar effect size (standard error [SE] change < 2) after additional adjustment.