Excerpts

The treatment main effect was not significant ( F 1,38 = 0.16; p = 0.69), but there was a near-significant treatment by age interaction effect ( F 1,215 = 3.51; p = 0.06).

Expression of TGF-β induced a 3-fold reduction in the potency of lysis with a strong trend (p = 0.06; N = 5).

In the 600–900 ms time window, there was a near-significant main effect of condition F (2, 18) = 3.28, MSE = 6.38, p = .06 at midline sites, F (2, 18) = 3.33, MSE = 15.56, p = .06 at lateral sites, but a significant interaction between condition and anteriority, F (6, 54) = 3.29, MSE = 0.47, p < .01 at midline sites, F (12, 108) = 2.46, MSE = 0.73, p < .01 at lateral sites.

0.45±0.03 or control, Mann Whitney U, p<0.0001), and a nonsignificant trend towards higher PPAR γ gene expression (0.58±0.10 for PAH vs. 0.47±0.11 for control, p = 0.06), and lower PPAR γ methylation (36.4±6.3% for PAH vs. 37.8±14.9% for control, p = 0.07, Mann Whitney U for all comparisons).

Interaction between both factors approached significance (p = 0.06).

Inverse correlations of heart rate with septal and lateral SDur were independent of sex, and male sex was a predictor of shorter septal SDur and a borderline significant predictor of a shorter lateral SDur (p = 0.06).

[ 29 ]) was higher in apple-supplemented rats (median: 2.1) compared to controls (median: 1.6) and this difference almost reached significance ( P = 0.06).

gattii , with a trend towards significance for TNF-α ( P = 0.06).

In ntBDNF RGCs, there was also a strong trend for a larger dendritic field area compared to ntGFP cells (p = 0.06; Fig. 5B ).

Finally, results of Model 8 revealed marginally significant effects of cocaine misuse diagnosis on the intercept ( p = .060) and slope ( p = .051), which were positive and negative, respectively.

However, these conclusions must be taken with caution, as the slopes in the two groups did not differ significantly from each other, according to the Fisher’s transformation test (they were only marginally significant): Z = 1.88, p = 0.060.

Ethanol treatment increased locomotor activity (two-way ANOVA: effect of treatment, F (1,36) = 4.67, p <0.05; Figure 6B ) and total arm entries in both groups, although the latter measure did not quite reach statistical significance ( p = 0.06; Figure 6C ).

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.

While IQ was a significant predictor ( p < .01) and Age was marginally significant ( p < .06), SES and Lextale scores were not (all p s>.30).

Notably, antisense VDR mRNA levels showed a trend to be increased in RRMS patients compared to controls (p = 0.060) but did not reach statistical significance in our set of samples ( Fig 2D ).

Those in the lowest height percentile group did not have a lower risk of early menarche than those in the mid-range although the p -value was close to significance (HR: 0.4, P <0.06).

In the East (existing motorway) area, a borderline significant (p = 0.06) interaction with chronic condition was found for mental wellbeing (MCS-8).

By contrast, the PGLS regression of 90 var and Sensitivity ave remains significant at P = 0.029 ( Figure 4 ) and the PGLS regression of 90 var and Sensitivity max is near significance at P = 0.060.

It should also be noted that the importance of previous pregnancies went from marginal significance (p = 0.06) to significant (p = 0.04) in this analysis as well.

Only amplification of the EGFR showed a trend towards association with poor prognosis (p = 0.060).

While the association with violence in the pairwise comparison between the Met homozygous and Val homozygous groups did not reach our threshold of statistical significance, a clear trend was identified in the anticipated direction (DOR = 1.63; 95% CI = 0.94–2.82; z = 1.55, p = 0.06).

Although the RYGB patients in this study did lose more weight, the difference was only borderline significant (p = 0.06, S3 Table in S2 File ) and no conclusions can be drawn about the greater efficacy of either surgery in weight loss within the study timeframe.

SPECT/CT was significantly more accurate for experienced than for inexperienced readers (p < 0.001), while there was borderline significance concerning MRI (p = 0.06).

Serum at baseline and liver at S45-B are nearly significant models, with p = 0.06.

Although STI incidence between sites was relatively similar, there was a nonsignificant trend towards a greater incidence of multiple active STIs at the eThekwini site compared to the Tshwane site (48.9/100wy and 8.3/100wy respectively; S4 Table , p = 0.06).