Barely Significant

Excerpts

33,758 sentences · 1 filter applied

modestly significantp -value = 0.0390.8× alphaqualifiedgold
Chi-squared test of proportions for the self-reported ethnicity marginal effects showed mixed evidence, with no significant difference from the null expectation in CATIE (χ 2 statistic = 1.214; χ 2 p -value = 0.865) and a modestly significant result in STAR*D (χ 2 statistic = 3.100; χ 2 p -value = 0.039).
nominally significantp = 0.0390.8× alphagold
Linear regression analysis using age, sex and intracranial volume as a priori predictors revealed that MAPT diplotype was a predictor of left insula and right cerebellar Crus II lobar volumes at a nominally significant level ( p = 0.039 and p = 0.033, respectively), with the H1 haplotype predicting lower grey matter volumes.
highly significantP = 0.0390.8× alphaqualifiedgold
regular universal primers) there was a highly significant difference between the read abundance of bifidobacteria using ‘bifidobacteria-optimised’ primers compared to regular primers ( P = 0.039, t = 0.0026, with Bonferonni correction for multiple testing), but no significant differences between any of the other OTUs ( P >1.4).
Three-factor RM-ANOVA (target size x target location x luminance type) for BSRs showed a marginally statistically significant main effect of only target location [F(4,240) = 3.94, p = 0.04, η p 2 = 0.01)], while target size [F(1,240) = 2.13, p = 0.07, η p 2 = 0.03)] and stimulus luminance [F(1,240) = 20, p = 0.77, η p 2 ≤0.01)] were not statistically significant ( Fig 6 ).
mildly significantp = 0.040.8× alphaqualifiedgold
How much does differential homophily account for the distribution of HSV-2 and is there an epidemiologically relevant relationship between sexual homophily and geographic remoteness? Is there a relationship between the proportion of an individual’s homophilous contacts and their likelihood of having been exposed to HSV-2? Using a univariate logistic regression model, we found a mildly significant relationship between individuals’ proportion of homophilous sexual partners and having HSV-2 (OR = 1.8; 95% CI: 1.04–3.13; p = 0.04).