borderline significancep = 0.07
Additionally, subjective social status may be a potential influencing factor for depression in middle-aged individuals, exhibiting borderline significance ( p = 0.07).
Additionally, subjective social status may be a potential influencing factor for depression in middle-aged individuals, exhibiting borderline significance ( p = 0.07).
The prediction from intention to breastfeeding was weaker for exclusive breastfeeding persistence until 6 months (Table 4 ): a marginally significant association was found between intention to breastfeed and exclusive breastfeeding at 6 months (95% CI 0.88–19.42, P < 0.07, OR 4.13).
There were marginally significant results for number of vegetable serves (p = 0.071) and of vigorous PA sessions (p = 0.065), both demonstrating an incremental effect as the number increased.
For life evaluation (the evaluative component of SWB), the results only showed a trend to significant differences (F(3,332) = 2.37, p = .071).
For social loneliness, the interaction was marginally non-significant (F(4, 3975) = 2.16, p = .071), but post hoc comparisons revealed a clear gradient: All pairwise limitation comparisons were significant in the middle-aged group ( p s < 0.007), two of three were significant in the 66–79 group, and none reached significance in the 80 + group.
We found a marginally significant network effect for fruit consumption (H2a: ρ = 0.086, p = 0.071) and a significant positive network effect for physical activity (H2c: ρ = 0.233, p = 0.049).
There was a marginally non-significant overall difference between ethnic groups (P = 0.071), and none of the multiple comparisons achieved significance (P > 0.05).
There was also a marginally significant association between being obese [0.67 (0.43–1.04), P = 0.072] and lower risk for premature mortality.
Differences in mean daily steps between income groups were no longer significant when controlling for sex; although there was a trend towards significance ( F (4,262) = 2.17, p = 0.073).
A difference of borderline significance (p = 0.074) was also noted with regard to the average frequency of using a new syringe among IDUs, with intervention IDUs reporting more frequently using a new syringe compared to the control group.
Results The prevalence of LTBI was 50.5% (95% CI: 46%, 55%) with no significant gender difference (49.8% among males versus 51.2% among females; Chi-square (χ 2 ) = 0.10; P = 0.41) and marginally non-significant increasing trends with age (44.6% among those below 24 years and 59.7% in the age range of 45-64 years; χ 2 = 6.91; P = 0.075).
Similar to the other multivariate analyses, participants at or below the poverty line were less likely to engage in risky injection drug use behaviors, although this was marginally significant (OR 0.50, 95 % CI: 0.23-1.07, p = 0.075) (Table 5 ).
There was a strong trend towards more smoking among men (p = 0.075).
Further, although having tried to quit using drugs in the past six months was associated with higher resilience in the unadjusted model (B = 4.72, p = 0.092), this association was only marginally significant after adjusting for confounders (B = 4.98, p = 0.075).
For children there was a negative effect of age with BMI lowered by 0.45 for each year of age but this effect had only borderline significance ( p = 0.0750).
In a non-prespecified analysis it heterogeneity was detected between Māori males and females in kit return rates ( p = 0.035); this was of borderline significance for Pacific ( p = 0.075), with a stronger negative effect on participation observed in males than females.
Likewise, there was a marginally significant relationship between rural area residency (OR: 0.88; P = 0.076) and depression (OR: 0.74; P = 0.087) with short sleep duration.
After adjusting for sex and age in Model 2, the association for PM1 remained significant but slightly attenuated (OR = 1.07, 95% CI: 1.01–1.14, P = 0.028), whereas PM2.5 became marginally non-significant (OR = 1.06, 95% CI: 0.99–1.12, P = 0.076).
At six weeks these scores were 90 (range 70–95) and 80 (55–90) respectively and the difference approached significance (p=0.076).
These results show that marginally significant trends exist in the results of men ( p = 0.0769) and women ( p = 0.0788), respectively.
Although the differences were small and only marginally statistically significant (Student’ t-test p = 0.077 to 0.131 between within 1 st and outside of 2 nd ring groups depending on which cutoff is used), there was consistency with differences in mean BMI between categories for students aged 16 to 17.
Grip strength during elbow extension significantly influenced performance in the assembly task (F = 5.201, p = 0.024, partial η2 = 0.043), whereas grip strength during elbow flexion approached significance (F = 3.191, p = 0.077, partial η2 = 0.027).
In Step two the CCS-CA is linked with depression as measured by the CESD-R ( p < 0.001), and although risk for substance use and abuse approached significance as measured by CAGE-AID ( p = 0.078) it is not reported here, but the reason for this finding is discussed.
As shown in Table 2 , the increase in the severity of bodily pain across the three-time points was statistically significant among those with NGM and T2D (p <0.001), but marginally non-significant in the prediabetes group (p <0.078).
The most influenced SF-36 subscale was PF since the differences, for all the variables studied, were statistically significant except for marital status, which was marginally insignificant ( P = 0.078).