of borderline significancep = .056
The variation in types of control predictors was of borderline significance ( p = .056) in terms of effect.
The variation in types of control predictors was of borderline significance ( p = .056) in terms of effect.
A Multi-Factorial ANCOVA performed on RTs using EC as categorical factor, and Sound Condition as well as Facial Emotion as the within-group variables indicated only a statistical trend for an interaction between EC and Sound Condition (F 2,58 = 2.95, p = 0.056).
The Small Mask produced only 28% (SE 11%) threshold elevation with respect to the baseline condition, of borderline significance [t(4) = 2.67, p = .056].
Response to IFN Beta Therapy The SNP rs20576 in exon 5 in TRAILR-1, which showed a trend in the original cohort (recessive model: p = 0.056, OR = 0.41), was significantly associated in the validation cohort (recessive model: p = 4.83×10 −3 , OR = 0.19) and it reached the Bonferroni level of significance in the joint analysis (recessive model: p = 8.88×10 −4 , pc = 0.048, OR = 0.30) ( Table 2 ).
Phylogenetic Comparative Analyses We observed a significant phylogenetic signal for average infection load (P = 0.033), a marginally significant phylogenetic signal for hazard ratio (P = 0.056) and no significant phylogenetic signal for log response ratio (P = 0.118, Fig 3A–3C ; Table 1 ).
In this study, initial maximal lactate (max lactate at T0) was barely not statistically significant after adjusting for confounders ( p = 0. 056 ) ( Table 5 ).
This masks the fact that the groups were different (almost significant at p=0.056) on the GHS score at the pre-test, but not at the post-test (p=0.826), and that the app did only rebalance initial differences between the groups.
In addition, RPC microcapillary VD, which excluded the large vessels, showed a trend towards vessel loss (p = 0.056) and a hedges g of 0.79.
A marginally significant difference was observed between the infant and younger-adult faces: t (20) = 2.03, p <0.056, indicating more attraction towards the relevant age categories when categorizing infant compared to adult faces ( Figures 2 & 3 ).
In the full model, salinity showed a significant positive effect (p < 0.001), whereas temperature exhibited a marginally non-significant positive effect (p = 0.056).
Analysis of variance revealed a trend towards significance in the interaction between Age and Treatment (F(1,68) = 3.79, p = 0.056).
When we combined subjects with acute DILI from the US DILIN cohort and those with ALF due to drugs other than Apap, to AIH, or to acute hepatitis B [which groups are biologically and patho-physiologically more similar to the acute DILIN subjects], we found a total of three analytes that were significantly different between those who died vs those who lived, namely, serum albumin, IL-6 and IL-8, and one analyte that showed a strong trend towards significance, namely, RANTES (p = 0.056).
Higher vitamin D level was also associated with some better behavioral outcomes of the infants that almost approached significance i.e., they were more active (r = 0.13, p = 0.056) and they vocalized more (r = 0.12, p = 0.087) during test administration compared to the infants with lower vitamin D level.
Patients’ non-medical characteristics were found to be significantly positively associated in the univariate comparisons with deferral of the final decision (p = 0.009) and borderline significant after multivariate adjustment (p = 0.056).
In multivariate analysis for high-grade prostate cancer, there was no significant association for patients older than 60 years, whereas the DM+PC group showed borderline significance regarding the risk of high-grade prostate cancer detection for younger men (OR 5.019, P = 0.056).
For the remote association task, the main effects were not significant (all F-values < 1.55, all p-values > 0.100), but the interaction was marginally significant (F(1,98) = 1.64, partial η 2 = 0.041, p = 0.056), and the simple main effect test showed that the number of correct responses decreased with contingent-pay only in the laboratory condition (t(89) = 2.47, d = 0.93, p = 0.015) (see Fig 2(A)) .
We found that there was a marginal significance for RFS in ER-negative (ER-) group with higher PA1-nuc level ( Figure S1 B, P = 0.056).
Moreover, the analysis also showed a marginally significant Gender × Word type interaction, b = .39, SE = .20, t (147.1) = 1.93, p = .056.
In this model, the path from group to mAge acceleration approached significance (a 1 = 0.35, SE = 0.18, P = 0.056), as did the path from mAge to visual attention to the eyes (a 2 = -0.06, SE = 0.03, P = 0.042).
Another specific concern is the borderline significance (p < 0.056) for the regression model that tested loadings on the first factor of the lifestyle model, likely due to a small sample size.
The increased level of mucosal MMP-1 in iUC tissues compared to fCD tissue approached significance (p = 0.056).
Overall survival analysis with 60 patients did not achieve statistical significance; however, a high trend toward significance was found between patients with high and low CDSE1 expression ( P = 0.056).
The main effects of Race and Gender failed to reach the required level of significance, although the main effect of Gender was approaching significance (p = 0.056).
The χ 2 test indicated that the staining score of HPSE protein was significantly correlated with tumor grade ( P = 0.012, Table 2 ), and that the correlation between HPSE protein expression and recurrence status was marginally significant as well ( P = 0.056, Table 2 ), which suggests that HPSE expression might be significantly correlated with recurrence if the sample size was big enough.
We observed a marginally significant difference between the neutral-matched and neutral-nonmatched words (p = 0.056), with slightly faster RTs to the neutral-nonmatched words ( Table 2 ).