“only marginally significant”

Indeed, when allelic richness was compared without CapIsr, the difference between populations disappeared (Kruskal–Wallis test, χ 2 = 4.745, df = 9, P = 0.856), and the difference between habitat types became only marginally significant (Kruskal–Wallis test, χ 2 = 5.804, df = 2, P = 0.055).

Risk Assessment of Iodine Deficiency from Exposure to Environmental Iodine Uptake Inhibitors Figure 2 A confirms that dairy consumption was an important dietary pattern associated with iodine deficiency in the PURE-24USE study ( F = 18.7, p = 1.75 × 10 −5 , n = 725) as compared to 24 h sodium excretion ( F = 16.9, p = 4.47 × 10 −5 , n = 737), and bread and cereal consumption ( F = 1.44, p = 0.230, n = 728); the latter food source of iodine was only marginally significant when comparing iodine deficient vs. iodine sufficient participants in an unadjusted student’s t-test ( p = 0.0551).

In addition, the hypothesized positive NRC–symptom association was significant in countries with higher religiosity ( r = 0.6639, SE = 0.0679, p < 0.0001) but only marginally significant in those with lower religiosity ( r = 0.1434, SE = 0.0749, p = 0.0556). 3.5.

GFAP levels were increased in 3xTg-AD with respect to NTg mice ( Figure 6 A,C), although the difference was only marginally significant ( U -value = 3; p = 0.0556; r = 0.76).

However, the choice of physician-directed neoadjuvant therapy was only marginally significant ( P = 0.0559) after adjusting for these factors.

Plants originating from riverine habitats produced 40–80 % more biomass after fragmentation than plants originating from coastal habitats, but this difference was only marginally significant statistically ( P = 0.056; Fig. 4 C and D, Table 1 ).

(3) Regression analysis to test the effect of visuospatial WM on error rate learning slope while controlling for math anxiety (path b) was only marginally significant, R 2 = 0.23, F (2,22) = 3.30, p = 0.056 (cf.

In contrast, the control group exhibited only marginally significant deterioration trends in language ability ( p = 0.056) and executive function ( p = 0.059), while the remaining domains remained stable (all p > 0.05).

Although the odds ratio (OR) for the pooled RSA sample and the controls was only marginally significant (p = 0.056), OR for the RSA women with 2–3 abortions and the controls was significant (p = 0.03), suggesting a protective role for the allele ( Table 2 ).

For example, the correlation between IU and LPP amplitude in response to uncertain threats was only marginally significant in the present study ( p = 0.056).

Although the top triplet mutations in KRAS, NF1 and TP53 showed a significant substantial increase in OS (p=0.00041) in the 1,150-patient cohort, the increase was only marginally significant (p=0.056) in the larger CPI-treated cohort ( figure 4C and online supplemental figure S2C ).

Mothers of exclusively breastfed infants possess a greater dietary diversity score, averaging 5.62, compared to 5.40 for those whose infants are not exclusively breastfed; nonetheless, the difference is only marginally significant ( p = 0.056).

However, to what extent can we attach biological meaning to a reaction norm that is statistically unsupported? A slight reaction norm was obtained when studying short-term variability (i.e., within a breeding season) in the FID of rural burrowing owls 17 , but results are only marginally significant when reanalyzed and applying the most recommended likelihood ratio test 42 (p = 0.056).

non-frailty difference was only marginally significant ( t (412) = 2.36, p = 0.056, Cohen’s d = 0.27, 95% CI [0.04, 0.50]).

This correlation was also positive but only marginally significant during picture-negative condition, r = 0.13, p = 0.056, 95% CI = [−0.0055, 0.38]).

3 ), although the difference in 2010 was only marginally significant (χ 2 = 5.76, df = 2, p = 0.056).

Bees also tended to consume less CCRI41 pollen than imidacloprid-contaminated pollen though it was only marginally significant ( P = 0.056).

Trade-off at the inter-specific level In both communities, we found that species with heavier seeds had fewer seeds per fruit/infructescence than those with lighter seeds ( Fig 2 ), although in the lowland community the relationship was only marginally significant ( F 1, 22 = 4.06, P = 0.056 and F 1, 16 = 19.03, P < 0.0001, for Ryghsetra and Finse respectively; Fig 2A and 2B ). λ was very close to 1 in both models (0.98 and 1.13 for the lowland and the alpine communities, respectively), suggesting that these traits covary in direct proportion to their shared evolutionary history.

In addition, it is worth noting that the co-occurring relationship between ADHD and ASD in the prediction of sleep problems was only marginally significant ( p = 0.056), thus, a larger sample may reflect a different result.

These results remain statistically significant using FDR-correction for multiple comparisons, except at 24 months where it is only marginally significant ( p = .056).

Up-regulation of CA10 expressions were found in 7 of the 12 tumors with sW182* mutation (58.3%), while only 4 of the 19 tumors with wild type HBS had CA10 up-regulation (21.0%), but the difference was only marginally significant (p = 0.056) ( Table 1 ).

Interestingly, sugary food consumption (including table sugar, chocolate snacks, marmalade, honey, etc.) was lower in those individuals with FA, but in this case, the differences were only marginally significant ( p = 0.056). 3.3.

The ANOVA revealed the significant main effect of the Object condition (F = 9.84, p = 0.003, η 2 p = 0.159) with a higher hit rate in OP condition and a significant interaction between the two conditions (F = 14.916, p = 0.001, η 2 p = 0.223), wherein + PA condition there was a higher hit rate in OP (M OP = 0.984, SD OP = 0.02) than OM (M OM = 0.997, SD OM = 0.028), meanwhile, the main effect of the Perceived Access condition was only marginally significant (F = 3.813, p = 0.056) with higher hit rate in PA− (M −PA = 0.983, SD −PA = 0.023) than PA + (M +PA = 0.977, SD +PA = 0.028) .

The main effect of reason for group membership was only marginally significant, F (2, 281) = 2.91, p = 0.056, η 2 p = 0.01.

Alone condition individuals showed no evidence of an increase in task engagement VC, t < 1; data regarding HR reactivity scores was only marginally significant, t (47) = 1.95, p = 0.056, d = 0.57 ( M = 4.94, SD = 17.54).