Excerpts

0.6%; P = 0.012) and a nearly significant difference between pre-SMA and dPMc (−10.7% vs. 0.6%; P = 0.057), both indicating stronger M1 suppression for pIFG and pre-SMA conditioning than for dPMc conditioning when the critical 40-ms ISI was tested.

Additionally, Approach Motivation was also non-significant ( b = −0.02 [−0.07, 0.03], z = −0.84, p =.40), and Mood Disturbance was marginally significant ( b = 0.07 [−0.003, 0.14], z = 1.90, p =.057).

Importantly, the interaction between Emotion, Validity, and Goal was almost significant ( F 1,39 = 3.837, p = 0.057, η p 2 = 0.090, BF incl = 1.986 suggesting anecdotal evidence) suggesting that the spatial orienting towards emotional faces captured by this early visual component was influenced by Emotion and Goal.

Despite this difference, the test result was borderline significant (W = 555, p = 0.057).

Cases that harbored an EBF1 deletion showed a trend towards higher MRD levels after induction therapy compared to non- EBF1 deleted cases (OR = 5.16, p = 0.057; Fig. 3B ).

On the contrary, they showed a shelter preference for seawater-only shelters that was of borderline significance (59.8% avoidance, n = 20, p = 0.057) (Fig. 1 ).

Finally, there was a marginally significant two-step indirect effect between capitalization attempts and positive emotions via perceived active-constructive feedback and optimism, b = 0.002, SE = 0.001, p =.057.

Centroid size has a marginally nonsignificant effect on RS1 ( z = 1.90, P = 0.057).

Snack consumption approached significance ( p = 0.057), with all overweight/obese children reporting snack intake.

At the 2-year follow-up, the association was marginally non-significant (Exp(β) = 1.17, 95% CI: 1.00–1.38, P = 0.057).

This difference was marginally significant, t (41) = −1.962, p = 0.057, d = −0.350.

5 ), approximately 34% of the injected iron dose of PEG-PEI MNPs accumulated in the lungs compared to ~1% for CM-dextran (p = 0.057, borderline significance).

Sox2 high HPV-negative patients showed a strong trend towards enhanced DSS (p = 0.057) (Fig. 4c ).

TNFSF13 was near statistical significance with SKAT in the filter with all the rare variants included in the test (p = 0.057), but this gene did not meet the inclusion criteria with the other two filters (Table 5 ).

In the June 2016 sampling, the biomass was on average higher in the upper than lower soil layer, but the marginally significant soil layer × plot treatment interaction effect (P = 0.057) suggests that this difference occurred in W plots only (Fig. 1 , Table 1 ).

In Step 4, the Age X Asymmetry Index accounted for additional variance that was marginally significant (ΔR 2 = 0.040, p = 0.057; Fig. 4 C); the partial effect of sex was maintained ( p = 0.029).

There were no between-group differences in BMI ( p = 0.877) or LS-BMD related parameters, although the OF group showed a clear trend towards lower LS-BMD than the OA group ( p = 0.057).

This effect was marginally significant after 35 days (F 3,4 = 6.09, p = 0.057) and statistically significant after 64 days (F 3,4 = 7.27, p = 0.043, Fig. 4C ).

Furthermore, a statistical trend was found for skewnessglobal ( p = 0.057, higher values in participants with primary headache disorders).

In the ≥ 70-year subgroup, the protective effect of NHAPI race/ethnicity remained statistically significant ( p < 0.001), whereas the adverse effect associated with NHB race/ethnicity was of only borderline significance ( p = 0.057).

Compared with WT ureters, the Elf3 expression level in Col17a1 -KO ureters showed a trend toward a significant difference only at 2 weeks ( P = 0.057), whereas the forkhead box A1 ( Foxa1 ) level showed a significant difference at 1 day and a trend toward a significant difference at 2 weeks ( P = 0.057), consistent with Upk2 expression dynamics (Figs 6 B and C).

These differences were consistent among parents of both savant and non-savant children with ASD except in the motivation domain where the gender difference in the savant group was only marginally significant ( P = 0.057, Cohen’s d = 0.069 ).

The mean time to return to work in Group 1 (cerclage) was 12.78 ± 7.06 weeks, compared to 17.25 ± 6.15 weeks in Group 2, with a near-significant difference ( p = 0.057).

Additionally, the α-diversity analyses in next generation sequencing (NGS) showed a difference in taxonomic units (OTUs), i.e., there were more OTUs in migrants than in Italians, but the difference was not significant, though it was close to the limit of significance (p = 0.057).

There was a strong trend towards a difference between treatment groups from baseline to 4 weeks (f 1,24 = 3.99, p = 0.057) (see Fig. 4 , Table 4 ).