“nominally significant”

Meanwhile, when covariates were included, 7,350 genes were nominally significant (p < 0.05), and 5,532 genes remained significant after multiple comparison correction (padj < 0.05).

We did not identify any metabolites significantly related in the meta-analysis to any of the four traits (FDR < 0.05) where there was even a nominally significant association (uncorrected P < 0.05) in African-Americans where the effect estimate was in the opposite direction. 3.

For example, of the total 144 SNP subsets tested with AD as data set 1 (Table 3 ), all 144 (for GERD, PGM and gastritis-duodenitis), 139 (PUD), 133 (IBS), 130 (diverticulosis) and 42 (IBD) produced Fisher’s exact tests with at least nominally significant effect concordance (odds ratio [OR] > 1 and P < 0.05).

Genome-wide differential expression analysis between medicated and non-medicated samples in each lesion subtype resulted in 569 (DIE), 836 (OMA) and 638 (SUP) nominally significant genes ( p < 0.05).

Twenty one of the 24 multivariate GWAS loci reaching genome-wide significance had directionally consistent effects in the three studied datasets and 18 were nominally significant ( P < 0.05) in two or more datasets (Supplementary Fig. 1 ).

We combined all nominally significant (edgeR p < 0.05) DET from both brain regions into a single list.

After correction, the associations between VFM and fibre, magnesium, biotin or trans fatty acids were no longer nominally significant (P > 0.05).

Evidence of 22 (51%) non‐genetic biomarkers exhibited a nominally significant effect ( p < 0.05) on AS, and 7 associations (14%) showed small‐study effects.

Of the remaining eight risk SNPs without significant signals, they found nine genes among four SNPs that were at least nominally significant ( P <0.05).

Very little epistasis was apparentin the hotspot regions, with less than 7% of trans methQTL in these hotspots possessing a nominally significant (P<0.05) epistatic interaction, and less than 1%of trans methQTLwith a significant epistatic interaction(see Supplementary Table 3 ).

2 ; Supplementary Figures 1 , 2 ), and a nominally significant p-value (unadjusted p-value < 0.05) was used to define FSCV DEGs in these signatures.

The inverse variance weighted (IVW) method was selected as the primary estimator due to its efficiency under valid instrumental variable assumptions [ 23 ], and results were considered nominally significant at P < 0.05.

However, to avoid overlooking candidates of potential biological significance, for just the 6 h set, only nominally significant terms ( p < 0.05) are reported.

We did, however, observe nominally significant correlations ( p -value < 0.05) between other pairs of tested neurodegenerative diseases, except for FTD, for which there were no nominally significant correlations (Supplementary Table 1 ).

3.3 Univariate linear regression analysis Among the 831 features investigated, 42 showed a nominally significant difference at a p = .05 level between the n-3 LCPUFA supplementation and the placebo group.

In the Results, we present nominally significant results ( P < 0.05) results with a Bonferroni correction for the number of SNPs being analyzed ( α /2; P < 0.025), which was consistent with the approach used in a prior study assessing genetic variants and GxEs as predictors of mental health trajectories (Latendresse et al. 2011 ).

A nominally significant ( p-value < 0.05) association was observed when counting duplications only (OR = 1.10, p = 0.02).

Of the 66 significant loci in the European Caucasian meta-analysis, 56 were nominally significant ( P < 0.05), and 37 after Bonferroni correction ( P < 7.6e-04) in the meta-analyzed replication cohort.

We also identified 35 nominally significant differentially abundant proteins ( P < .05), with 84% of these detected at higher abundance after HS exposure.

Even among nominally significant DEGs (nDEGs p < 0.05; cortex n = 1567; striatum n = 906; cerebellum n = 487), there was limited overlap, with significant similarities being seen only among downregulated genes (Fig. 2 c and Supplementary Table 4), indicating that the effects of Mbd5 reduction are largely different across these three brain regions.

None of these were nominally significant in the full UKBB dataset ( p -value > 0.05).

None of these loci was even nominally significant ( p > 0.05) in the Han Chinese subgroup.

Only one of these SNPs showed a nominally significant association ( P < .05) in our data (rs909253, proxy for rs1041981, r 2 = 0.93; OR = 1.12; P = .005).

61% (n=125) of the EUR GWS SNPs had the same direction of effect in AAs, with 20 nominally significant (p<0.05) and 1 surviving Bonferroni correction.

To this end, a threshold to the cluster height was gradually reduced until a Kruskal–Wallis test of the gene-specific minimum p values from the eQTL analysis indicated nominally significant heterogeneity between the emerging sub-clusters (Kruskal–Wallis p < 0.05).