Barely Significant
← all phrases

“only marginally significant”

5,077 sentences · 5,077 papers · 5,448 search hits before verification · confirmed specimen

Sighted at

p<1.0p=0.9

Listed by Hankins, posted since · Hankins (2013) · Otte et al. (2022)

In the literature

only marginally significantP = 0.19814.0× alphagold
While this preferential settlement was only marginally significant for each plant genotype, Ler or Ll-0, when analyzed separately (F 1,40 = 1.72, P = 0.1981 and F 1,40 = 3.37, P = 0.0743 for Ler and Ll-0 respectively), it was significant when data from both genotypes were pooled together (F 1,80 = 4.86, P = 0.0304), indicating that virus infection reduced aphid preference after 24 h.
only marginally significantP = 0.4408.8× alphagold
The effects of Carbonyl ( P = 0.001), HTN ( P = 0.036), age ( P = 0.044) and smoking status ( P = 0.005) were still statistically significant, whereas the effect of area ( P = 0.107) was only marginally significant, and the effects of PAD stage ( P = 0.440), ABI (P = 0.259), BMI ( P = 0.233), and DM ( P = 0.971) were far from statistically significant.
only marginally significantp = 0.5611.2× alphagold
Testing 1078 miRNAs and 211 TF binding sites separately, we found one miRNA and 4 TFs consistently enriched across the 19 datasets for the up-down pattern, relative to up-up; however, the results were non-significant and only marginally significant compared to permutations (one-sided p = 0.56 and p = 0.069), respectively.
only marginally significantp = 0.57511.5× alphagold
Compared to the reference level (no involvement), all levels of participation are positively valued, although with different levels of significance: medium-low involvement (0.258; p = 0.002) is positive and significant; medium-high involvement (0.151; p = 0.073) is positive but only marginally significant; high involvement (0.049; p = 0.575) is positive but not significant.
only marginally significantP = 0.6112.2× alphagold
However, in the multivariate logistic regression analysis of the comparative cohort, the application of the same algorithm for prediction of lymph node involvement was only marginally significant and only due to the impact of vascular invasion (CD8: P = 0.61; vascular invasion: P = 0.02; tumor border configuration: P = 0.166).
Participants who perceived lower significant other support tended to report higher expression suppression if they were in Peru for a longer time compared to more recently arrived migrants [ t (376) = − 2.20, p = 0.028, R 2 adj = 0.01], whereas other interactions of different types of support with type of cohabitation were only marginally significant ( p’s > 0.07, see Table 9 ).
Repeated measures ANOVAs with the factors time (pre/post experiment) and group (HSA/control) on the participants emotional state before and after the experiment revealed no effects involving the factor group and only marginally significant effects of time for state anxiety and valence ratings suggesting a reduction in state anxiety and a deterioration of reported valence, independent of group (see Table 2 ).
However, the path from intrinsic motivation to innovation behavior ( β = 0.18, t = 2.0, p < 0.05) and those from cognitive load to innovation outcomes (CL2 → IS2: β = −0.18, t = −2.1, p < 0.05; CL3 → IS3: β = −0.16, t = −1.9, p < 0.05) were only marginally significant, suggesting that the influence of motivation weakens as it moves from psychological and cognitive processes to observable innovative action.