Excerpts

The difference in scores for mental health approached significance (F = 2.488, P = 0.06), while there were no significant differences in resilience (F = 1.389, P = 0.25) among the students of the four disciplines.

However, there was near significance ( p < 0.06) for PROMIS-D-SF scores of the individual with stroke at T1 predicting PROMIS-D-SF scores of the care partner at T3, with higher scores for individuals with stroke at T1 predicting lower care partner scores at T3.

Authoritative parenting practice showed a marginally significant difference ( p = 0.06) by adolescent sex, with a higher authoritative score among parents of boys.

Importantly, the interaction between purchase decision response and green product type was marginally significant, F (1, 34) = 3.79, p = 0.060, η p 2 = 0.10.

SES differences were less pronounced upon stratification, with trend tests significant only among females ( p = 0.004), and marginally significant among Hispanic males ( p = 0.06).

The effect was statistically significant for nurses but only of borderline significance for physicians (95% CI 1.0–3.8, p = 0.06). 4.

Moreover, episodes with higher emotional intensity were recalled with more clarity at the one-month post-assessment, whereas a close-to-significant trend was observed at one-week follow-up ( r = 0.225, p = 0.06).

A comparison of the proportion between those who visited the clinic and those who did not showed marginally statistically significant differences ( p = 0.0606). 4.

The results from the study design show modifying effects at the borderline significant level ( Figure S6 . β = −1.52, p = 0.061), which gained significance after the influential case was removed ( Figure S7 . β = −1.67, p = 0.010). 3.5.

A nearly significant difference occurred in the amount of snacking ( p = 0.061).

For PEMF, VT Abs changed significantly from pretesting to post-testing ( p = 0.001), but CON showed a nonsignificant trend towards difference ( p = 0.061).

Mothers who thought that littering and rubbish was a problem in their area had reduced hazards of stopping exclusive breastfeeding in the constant effects models, and this effect approached significance when SES was controlled for (M2 0.72, p = 0.061).

The difference between males and females approached significance ( p = 0.061).

However, the effect remained close to significance ( p = 0.061).

However, gender demonstrated a marginally significant association ( p = 0.061) with BP scores.

In Table 3 , the risk of NAET was still significantly increased for wood working ( p = 0.028), whilst a trend towards significance was calculated for leatherworking, p = 0.062.

The difference between groups at the old airport location before the move was marginally significant p = 0.062 [ 23 ], but not any more after the move.

None of the protocols had an impact on the executive function, whereas health-related quality of life showed a trend to significance in the whole sample only (EQindex overall sample, p = 0.062; d = 0.48 CMCT; d = 0.34 AMCT).

Ratings of ‘nauseous’ showed a trend toward higher ratings in the combination condition in comparison to the nicotine alone condition [F (2, 36) = 3.0, p=.062].

There was no significant difference between hair Hg in those with active disease ( n = 6) (1.2 ppm) compared to those with inactive disease ( n = 46) (1.69 ppm) as determined by BILAG, albeit this approached significance ( p = 0.062).

Although it is shown that the intrinsic orientation group scores higher in positive affect, close to significance when compared with the empty orientation group ( p = 0.062), this result should be considered tendentially.

After adjusting for covariates, the group × time interaction coefficient for outpatient clinic visits was 1.83 among all participants (marginal significance; p = 0.062) and 4.58 ( p < 0.01) among those with low income.

However, when analyzing the conditional effect of Family’s Income on BMI at the values of KHE, data indicates that for higher scores on KHE the effect of Family’s Income on BMI is marginally statistically significant ( b = 0.0909, p = 0.0624).

In fact, no pathway shown in Figure 3 is statistically significant, except for the mediated C’-path (the B-path was almost significant: p = 0.063).

After adding perceived organizational support to the regression analysis, the prediction effect was marginally significant ( β = −0.16, p = 0.063 in Model 2; β = −0.14, p = 0.088 in Model 3).