Barely Significant

Excerpts

33,758 sentences · 1 filter applied

marginally significantp = 0.061.2× alphagold
There is a significant difference when comparing the mean RMCBS slopes of symptomatic infected C57BL/6 and infected balb/c (p = 0.01); a significant difference when comparing symptomatic infected C57BL/6 and non-infected C57BL/6 controls (p = 0.004); a marginally significant difference (p = 0.06) when comparing symptomatic infected C57BL/6 with asymptomatic infected C57BL/6; a non-significant difference when comparing infected balb/c and non-infected control balb/c (p = 0.48); and a non-significant difference (p = 0.70) when comparing infected balb/c with asymptomatic infected C57BL/6 and non-infected control C57BL/6.
marginally significantp = 0.061.2× alphagold
Parent specific effects were not found in our sample, a GLM including parent (father/mother) as additional factor did not show a significant effect for parent , ( F (1,45) = 0.099, p = 0.75), while the main effect group and the interaction effect group × parenting style remained unchanged; the marginally significant main effect parenting style was not significant anymore, p = 0.06, due to model complexity.
marginally significantp = .061.2× alphagold
While there was a marginally significant correlation between the two outcome variables ( r = .32, p = .06), a sobel test [43] showed that the effect of social comparison (dummy coded as −2 for same-gender comparison, and +1 for opposite-gender and no comparison control) on visual self-representation was not mediated by explicit self-ratings, z = .84, p = .40.
marginal significancep = 0.061.2× alphagold
Conversely, TLR4 expression decreased dose-dependently with significantly more TLR4 expression seen in 1 ng/ml (p = 0.004) and with marginal significance at 5 ng/ml HMGB1-stimulation (p = 0.06) ( Figure 2E ). 3.5 HMGB1 induces Pp38 MAPK pathway To better understand the MAPK pathway activation by HMGB1, a semi quantitative assessment of phosphorylated (P) MAPK proteins was carried out.
nearly significantp = .061.2× alphagold
As we had already reported in our previous paper [ 19 ], there was a significant decrease in need satisfaction for belonging, F (1,14) = 19.64, p = .001, η p 2 = .58, self-esteem, F (1,14) = 4.89, p = .04, η p 2 = .26, and control, F (1,14) = 7.21, p = .02, η p 2 = .34, and a nearly significant reduction for meaningful existence, F (1,14) = 4.12, p = .06, η p 2 = .23, after exclusion in the Cyberball group.
borderline significantp = 0.061.2× alphagold
In separate models with log transformed adduct and metabolite values as the exposure variables, the direction and significance of the associations between adducts and outcomes were the same as the models with the dichotomized exposure with the exception of the CBCL DSM-oriented attention deficit hyperactivity scale raw score and CPRS DSM-IV Total scale raw score, which became borderline significant (p = 0.06, and p = 0.08, respectively) (data not shown).