“slightly significant”

Income has a slightly significant positive effects on being overweight or obese ( p < 0.1), but log of income squared has a significant negative effect on these ( p < 0.1).

The effect was slightly significant [ F (1,61) = 3.382, p < 0.1].

However, the results show a slightly significant and negative relationship between nursing (β = −1.146, p < 0.1) and pediatrics (β = −2.902, p < 0.05) compared to cardiology, which was the default department category in the models, concerning the citations. 3.2.

With manual-gating, the decrease in the pluripotency ratio in Cond 3 cells was slightly significant ( p < 0.1, Welch’s t -test), whereas the decrease in the ratio in Cond 3 cells was not observed with auto-gating.

There were slightly significant differences observed between the classic, quad, and maxillary defected groups ( p = 0.1).

However, the double interaction between the inoculation or not with ESA 402 and the temperature regime was slightly significant at p < 0.1 (Table S5 ).

The least poor SES generally spent more money to treat malaria, although the finding was only statistically significant in Nachi (p < 0.05) and slightly significant in Inyi (p < 0.10) (Table 9 ).

Some were significantly different ( P < 0.05), including red cell distribution width (RDW), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), insulin, IS HEC , HOMA-IR, secreted frizzled-related protein 1 (SFRP-1) and Type III procollagen peptide (PIIINP), whereas others showed slightly significant differences (0.05 < P < 0.10), such as interleukin 6 (IL-6), aspartate aminotransferase and gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT).

While both viruses significantly upregulated TNFAIP3 transcription as predicted by the model ( Fig 6 ), there was slightly significant statistical evidence that the magnitude of this upregulation was lower in cells infected by 22–25 (p<0.1) 4 Discussion We constructed a mechanistic regulatory circuit model of the intracellular signaling pathways governing Type I IFN response to VSV infection based on causal relationships between the RIG-I and NFκB pathways documented in published scientific literature and experimental observations.

As shown in Table 5 , interaction effects showed a slightly significant association between conventional beliefs and two strains, information strain (b = −0.333, p < 0.1) and health-related strain (b = 0.362, p < 0.1).

On the other hand, DIS and DR data were slightly significant ( p < 0.1) and WS scores not significant when BAs ≥ 0.217.

Moreover, in the current study, a low dose (2 mg/kg) of mirtazapine had a slightly significant effect on the trend of weekly body weight gain in our HFD-fed mice ( p < 0.1); however, this trend did not differ significantly when compared with the trend of body weight ( Figure S5 ).

In the year 2003–2010, the result is slightly significant ( ß = 0.0518, p < 0.1), in the year 2011–2017, the impact is more significant ( ß = 0.0718, P < 0.05).

While the control group showed both a slightly significant decrease in attachment to host country ( p < 0.1) and an (undesired) significant increase in attachment to home country ( p < 0.05), the online peer groups stayed stable in both of these measures.

and PSE 2 predicted service quality (β = −0.193, p < 0.001) negatively and had a slightly significant positive effect on turnover intentions (β = 0.094, p < 0.1).

At three months postoperatively, the values showed a mean of 4.93 ± 0.70 for the control site and 4.47 ± 0.83 for the experimental site, indicating a slightly significant difference ( P < 0.109).

Fisher’s two-sided exact test showed a slightly significant difference in the isolate genotypes ( M . platani , M . goesingense , and the others) between malting and non-malting barley ( p = 0.12) ( Table 3 ).

In the psychomotor measures, only the reinspection time shows a slightly significant interaction effect (F LCT initiation time = 2.10, p = 0.149; F LCT movement time = 0.001, p = 0.979; F FCT initiation time = 0.04, p = 0.837; F FCT reinspection time = 6.35, p = 0.12; and F FCT movement time = 3.09, p = 0.80).

A fixed model was used, and slightly significant heterogeneity was observed between the two groups ( I 2 =41%, P =0.15).

The results suggest slightly significant differences in the soil samples (Table 1 ; P = 0.152 and P = 0.093).

As to relative humidity, only high effect of relative humidity was slightly significant (for per 1 unit increase with RR of 1.0088 (95% CI: 1.0027–1.0150), I 2 = 72.6%, Egger’s test P = 0.159, N = 9).

In species groups, the Corn snake (23.36%, 25/107) showed a slightly significant difference in infection rate compared with the Pine snake (15.79%, 15/95, χ 2 = 1.818, p = 0.178), Common garter snake (19.54%, 17/87, χ 2 = 0.414, p = 0.520), California king snake (21.90%, 23/105, χ 2 = 0.064, p = 0.800), Hognose snake (18.64%, 22/118, χ 2 = 0.872, p = 0.350), and Black rat snake (21.98%, 20/91, χ 2 = 0.054, p = 0.817).

Secondary CPP had a slightly significant annual increase of +3.8% ( p = 0.198), and the cases were more prevalent before 2016.

In the subgroup analyses by study design, meta-analysis of case-control studies showed a significant association between vaccinations and increased risk of SLE [OR = 1.84, 95% CI (1.03–3.31), I 2 = 75.9%, P = 0.041], whereas meta-analysis of cohort studies suggested a slightly significant association between vaccinations and risk of SLE [OR = 0.85, 95% CI (0.65–1.11), I 2 = 68.3%, P = 0.243] (Table 2 ).

Although the 5-year IDFS rate for group 2 was not significantly different from those for groups 1 and 4, there was a slightly significant trend (84.2% vs. 88.2%, P = 0.2728; 81.6% vs. 88.2%, P = 0.0953, respectively) (Online Resource Fig. 1a).