Excerpts

forbesi (β = 0.39), though the departure from neutrality was only marginally significant (t = 2.0, df = 9, P = 0.08; Fig 2B , S3 and S5 Tables).

Furthermore, genotype data of rs1937780 displayed a borderline significance in the screening cohort (p = 0.08).

Western blot analysis of pSmad 2 expression showed a trend towards increased expression in diabetic mice, which was ameliorated to some extent by linagliptin (P = 0.08)( Fig 4B ).

These factors identified by univariate analysis were then applied to multivariate analysis, and GRB7 expression level showed marginal significance (P = 0.08) for the prognosis of ESCC patients in multivariate analysis.

MtDNA copy number in the COPD group was less than that in the healthy smoking group, but P value nearly achieved significance (250.3± 21.5 VS. 404.0± 76.7, P = 0.08) MtDNA copy number has no significance with age, gender, body mass index, current smoking, and pack-years in COPD group, healthy smoker group and no smoker group, respectively.

Fig 2 illustrates that the AUD+Gambling group had higher scores in the BIS Nonplanning ( t (100) = -3.024, p = 0.003, Cohen’s d = -0.634) and the BIS Total scores ( t (100) = -2.635, p = 0.010, Cohen’s d = -0.555), and a tendency toward significance in the BIS Motor Impulsivity ( t (100) = -1.767, p = 0.080, Cohen’s d = -0.371).

Indeed, strains that evolved with a competitor had significantly higher growth rates than strains evolved alone ( Fig 4a ), and there was a slight increase in growth plasticity, albeit this effect was only marginally significant (p = 0.08, Table 1 ).

A two-way ANOVA with 2 levels of movement property (dynamic central + static peripheral, static central + dynamic peripheral) x 2 levels of stimulus orientations (upright central + inverted peripheral, inverted central + upright peripheral) on the proportion of valid trials revealed a marginally significant interaction, F (1,17) = 3.53, p = .08, η p 2 = .17.

The main effect of Period was marginally significant ( F (1, 55) = 3.22, p = .08, η p 2 = .06), which indicated that VC was higher before the pandemic than after.

DUT was significantly associated with smoking (p = 0.01), HELZ was of marginal significance with alcohol (p = 0.08), and although smokers had lower HELZ expression than never smokers as with RNAseq, the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.34).

Only haplotype *2 in the recipient (rs41507953 A / rs751141 A/ rs1042032 G) displayed a statistical trend towards higher risk of ARE [OR = 2.28 (0.92–5.67), p = 0.08].

A two-way mixed-design ANOVA [ Group (NEA, Control) X Time (Pre/Post experimental phase)] with repeated-measures on the second factor ( Time ) revealed that the Group X Time interaction approached significance ( F (1, 45) = 3.13, p = .08, η p 2 = .06).

Although the mean difference between causally related and unrelated words (1.97μV) was larger than the mean difference between causally related and hierarchically related words (1.49μV), only marginally significant difference was found between causally related and unrelated words ( p = .08).

The interaction was borderline significant ( p = 0.08), which motivated us to look at the effect of peripapillary scleral quadrant on fiber alignment within each diagnosis group.

n = 64, 31.5% for males), and the maximum HIV viral load was considerably higher for women than for men (median maximum of 141,548 copies/mL and 53,180 copies/mL for women and men, respectively), although this achieved only borderline significance (p = 0.08).

A trend close to significance was apparent for type 2 diabetic patients (p = 0.08) and with airway obstruction (p = 0.11).

The interaction of effort and reachability condition was statistically significant for wanting (random intercept regression, Physical × Weight coefficient = -0.21, p = .03, two-sided; d = 0.24) and marginally significant for liking ratings (Physical × Weight coefficient = -0.13, p = .08, two-sided; d = 0.15).

The ANOVA on P3 revealed a marginally significant main effect of prime type, F (1, 17) = 3.28, p = 0.08, η p 2 = 0.16, with a greater P3 amplitude for the strongly masked no-go trials ( M = 7.94 μV, SD = 0.91) than that for the strongly masked go trials ( M = 7.56 μV, SD = 0.88).

In GA, the Mantel r values between site distance and site dissimilarity were marginally significant for species and functional groups (Randomization tests: P = 0.08 and 0.06, respectively), and significant for taxonomic groups (Randomization tests: P = 0.04).

There was also a near-significant positive trend between diversity and low-intensity developed space (estimate = 0.268 ± 0.153, t = 1.755, p = 0.080), and although shrubland was retained in the best model, the relationship with this predictor was non-significant (t = 1.598, p = 0.110).

After controlling for Trait Anxiety, the correlation between ΔANI and Bell 1 was marginally significant for the entire group ( r = .32, p = .08), and significant for the group that failed to solve the puzzle ( r = .59, p < .05).

However, they showed marginally significant differences in the post-TSST measure, t (78) = 1.75, p = 0.08, Cohen’s d = 0.4, with Excess weight participants performing significantly poorer than Normal weight controls.

Although the results did not show any significant effect, Table 6 shows a two-way interaction between bystanders’ attitude towards the participants and virtual peer speakers approaching significance ( p = .08).

These estimates were not reduced with further adjustment for potential individual and occupational confounders, although the estimates for high sitting became marginally non-significant ( P = 0.08) ( Table 4 ).

The multivariate model ( Table 2 ) indicated that the rate of change in CD4+CD38+HLA-DR+% (activated) was marginally significant by CMV status (p = 0.08 for CMV status by week interaction).