“nominally significant”

A higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) showed a consistent association with a lower likelihood of functional improvement: this effect did not reach the multiplicity-adjusted significance threshold in the primary multivariable logistic regression model but was directionally similar and nominally significant in the ordinal shift sensitivity analysis.

For the additional tag SNPs, however, this may not be the case, and none of the nominally significant results reported here would remain significant if a Bonferroni correction for the 31 tag SNPs were applied.

In total, we detected 175 genes that were nominally significant in the discovery dataset and were replicated in the validation dataset ( Supplementary Material, Table S12 ) and 38 genes being DE in both datasets (with |log 2 FC| > 1 and P < 0.05) ( Fig. 7 ).

In the MVMR adjusting for SES ( Figure 4b ), the effect of MDD on smoking initiation was completely attenuated, while the effect on PAU remained almost unchanged and was nominally significant across all SES proxies.

Among the 12 cell types present in thyroid tissue, we identified eight cell types that exhibited nominally significant associations with at least one hypothyroidism dataset (Supplementary Data 12 ), which were endothelial cell, endothelial cell (APC), smooth muscle cell, T cell, macrophage, dendritic cell, B cell and B cell (Plasmacyte).

These nominally significant associations are listed in Table 3 (presented without multiple comparison considerations in order to demonstrate the multiplicity of involved ischemic axes and support future specific SNP and pathway hypothesis testing).

For the other genes, nominally significant associations were identified in brain tissue ( RAB31 and DOK6 ) and ovary ( SLC40A1 ). 3.5.

Third, the multiplicity of pre/post-comparisons in an exploratory design without formal correction for multiple testing increases the probability of nominally significant findings arising by chance; for this reason, effect sizes (Cohen’s d) are reported prominently alongside p -values throughout, and 95% confidence intervals have been added to Table 2 and Table 3 to allow readers to weigh both magnitude and precision.

A two-sided P -value <0.05 was considered nominally significant for all tests in this post hoc analysis.

47 Regarding interpretation based on domain knowledge, nominally significant results do not necessarily constitute clinically meaningful or informative findings at the population, group, or individual level.

Nine subtypes were derived using consensus clustering with the K-means algorithm, applied to a TCGA data subset (335 breast tumours and 3,869 CpGs showing nominally significant association with survival) [ 31 ].

Even though the post-adjustment p values remained nominally significant, the dramatic reduction in significance occasioned by considering ancestry does not lend confidence to its being a true effect and rather suggests that it is due to insufficiently rigorous ancestry categorization of the ‘Southern European’ set, which was based solely on self-reporting rather than unbiased genome-wide genotyping data.

This revealed nominally significant evidence that AAO was correlated with polygenic score but only when the analysis was restricted to SNPs with p T < 0.01 (Table 2 ).

Sensitivity analyses The test of heterogeneity results for significant and nominally significant estimates is detailed in Table 3 .

Finally, a coding variant in the solute carrier family 18 member A1 ( SLC18A1 ) gene, a vesicular monoamine transporter, was nominally significant associated with vocabulary ( P meta = .001). 4.

Pairwise comparisons, using one-tailed tests given the directional predictions, yielded two nominally significant results.

Initially, we used the fast epistatic analysis method, BOOST ( Wan et al., 2010 ), on the SNPs located in genes and their regulatory regions to identify the most relevant SNPs and then used the standard epistatic analysis method on nominally significant epistatic SNP-SNP combinations to generate OR for GIs (Steps 1-6 in Figure 2 ).

Nineteen single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in 9 genes (AVP, corticotropin-releasing hormone receptor 1 ( CRHR1 ), corticotropin-releasing hormone receptor 2 ( CRHR2 ), FK506-binding protein 51 ( FKBP5 ), nuclear receptor subfamily 3, group C, member 2 (mineralocorticoid receptor ( NR3C2 )), AVPR1A , GAL , galanin receptor 1 ( GLRA1) , and neuropeptide Y receptor Y1 ( NPY1R )) showed nominally significant association with heroin addiction ( Levran et al., 2014a ).

Additionally, SNP-heritability estimates were attenuated when estimated among the whole sample but remained nominally significant when estimated among males and females combined and among males only.

Only nominally significant p values (<0.05) for SNPs within SYNE1 were observed in both GAIN analyses involving irritable mania.

The association between IL-6 and CWP was nominally significant in a univariate model with an OR of 1.31 (95% CI 1.03 to 1.66) and p value of 0.030.

The results of this work demonstrate that, indeed, by using data from wheat accessions, it is possible to obtain estimated BV numbers for predicting calcium and potassium content (for calcium and potassium, all p-values obtained were less than the nominally significant threshold of 0.05).

While this site was the most statistically significant, 4 other CpG sites in the same CpG island were also nominally significant (data not shown) and consistent with the finding in cg18181703 , all 4 sites the methylation status was negatively correlated with obesity.

The LEPR SNP rs1137101 (G/G homozygotes) was significantly associated with weight gain (BMI z categories) over time when compared to A/A (OR 4.13) and heterozygotes showed nominally significant association with weight change.

Using a procedure adapted from existent umbrella reviews [ 32 ], we will identify outcomes and interventions for which summary effects showed strong evidence of significance (p<0.001); were based on more than 1000 randomized participants; did not have large heterogeneity between studies (I 2 <75%); their 95% prediction interval excluded the null; extrapolation of the Egger regression line for infinite sample size still suggested a nominally significant effect (i.e., 95% confidence interval did not include the null); had no evidence for excess significance; came from systematic reviews and meta-analysis with a score of at least 9 on the AMSTAR-2 scale; came from systematic reviews and meta-analysis not funded by the entity developing or marketing the intervention and free from authors with a financial conflict of interest associated to the intervention.