“only marginally significant”

Transition Rates—Visible Patterning For human-visible patterning, a model with one hidden rate was supported over a model without hidden rates ( Table 1 ), though the likelihood-ratio test was only marginally significant (P = 0.054).

For computer self-efficacy, the same trend emerged amongst the employment status categories but was only marginally significant ( p = 0.054).

Mothers’ SPP was positively correlated with their daughters’ SPP ( r = 0.33) and SOP ( r = 0.25; here, the correlation is only marginally significant, p = 0.054).

Familiar partner recognition by males There were significant differences in TF rates of males among trials (repeated measures GLM, F 3,27 = 3.95, P = 0.018) and between treatments ( F 1,9 = 28.69, P < 0.0005) but the interaction between trial and treatment was only marginally significant ( F 3,27 = 2.89, P = 0.054).

Although maternal HIV was associated with 40% increased odds for emergency caesarean section, the difference was only marginally significant (p = 0.054).

1 b), although this effect was only marginally significant ( p = 0.054).

The task notation × number range interaction was only marginally significant F (1,26) = 4.057, p = 0.054, η p 2 = 0.135.

Inspection and palpation in cardiac examination were more error-prone in male than female students, although the differences were only marginally significant (both p = 0.054), and percussion in cardiac examination was more error-prone in female students ( p = 0.008, Table 4 ).

Branch WD showed a similar trend, though it was weaker and only marginally significant ( R 2 = 0.09, P = 0.054; see Supporting Information—Table S5 ).

Replication of our results in larger studies might be interesting, especially for validating the weak associations between TS of pain and changes in dissociation from pre‐ to post‐stimulation, which showed a small, only marginally significant effect ( r s = −0.41; p = 0.054) in the present study.

However, divorced women were only found within the depressed women group (two cases), thus, marital status may be correlated to PPD but was only marginally significant ( p value = 0.054).

However, when the TMB data were adjusted for maximum allele frequency (max AF), only marginally significant differences in TMB levels were observed between the two groups (P=0.0542).

Instead, the observed variation in V̇ O 2 max appeared to be associated with variation in heart rate, which was also significantly affected by inspired P O 2 (P < 0.0001), though the effect of genotype was only marginally significant (P = 0.0545; Additional file 5 : Fig.

The total effect of FFI on communicative competence was negative and only marginally significant (β = −0.25 to −0.44, p = 0.055, 95% CI [−0.44, −0.06]).

Along PLR, SGS was significant in adults ( Sp = 0.0049 ± 0.0046, p = 0.020), but only marginally significant in saplings ( Sp = 0.0037 ± 0.0074, p = 0.055).

32%) was only marginally significant ( p = 0.055).

The median age of assemblage A cases (47.5 years [range, 1 to 94 years]) was higher than that of assemblage B cases (37 years [range, 1 to 79 years]), but the difference was only marginally significant (Mann-Whitney U test, P = 0.055) ( Fig. 2 ).

Clusterin manifestation was not found to be a significant prognostic indicator ( P = 0.312; Figure 4 ), and lymphovascular invasion was only marginally significant ( P = 0.055).

Although the experimental group showed higher average scores, the difference between groups was only marginally significant ( p = 0.055), likely due to the small sample size ( n = 23).

However, the unfavorable genotypes became only marginally significant (p=0.055).

3 While orthogonal planned contrasts do not typically require adjustment for multiple comparisons, as they are considered protected from inflated Type I error rates, it should be noted that given three contrasts, an adjustment for three comparisons would render this effect only marginally significant: Bonferroni-Holm correction – p = 0.055; Dunn correction – p = 0.054.

In contrast, the deductible coefficient was weak and only marginally significant ( p = 0.055).

When we additionally controlled for demographics, the positive link for team narcissism became only marginally significant, B = 0.10, 95% CI [0.01, 0.19], β = .15, p = .055 (although note that the standardized effect size remained identical).

Respondents’ perception of water quality was positively associated with the likelihood of boiling water (OR = 1.28), although this was only marginally significant ( p = 0.055).

Model U2 includes education and the negative coefficient of baseline CMR remains significant with a reduced magnitude ( b = −0.16, p = .003), but the negative coefficient of CMR increase is only marginally significant ( b = −0.10, p = .055), indicating that education explains part of the variance that was previously explained by CMR level and change.