Barely Significant

Excerpts

27,100 sentences · 1 filter applied

marginally significantp = 0.0581.2× alphagold
Furthermore, using the SPSS macro PROCESS 30 to analyze the total sample (adjusting for age and gender), NPY genotypes had a significant main effect on HF ( B = 0.10, SE = 0.04, t = 2.45, p = 0.014) and a marginally significant effect on RMSSD ( B = 0.04, SE = 0.02, t = 1.90, p = 0.058), but PSS scores were not.
marginally significantp = .0581.2× alphagold
Bonferroni-corrected post-hoc analysis on the interaction effect revealed a significant difference (p = .03) between CS+ 1ws (mean = 523.77 ms; sd = 149.42 ms) and CS+ 2ws (mean = 540.63 ms; sd = 161.03 ms) in the second hemiblock; a marginally significant effect emerged also for the first hemiblock (p = .058), with CS+ 1ws (mean = 517.36 ms; sd = 142.10 ms) presenting slightly faster reaction times than CS+ 2ws (mean = 527.55 ms; sd = 147.02 ms).
showed a trendP = 0.0581.2× alpha
The prevalence of most comorbidities, including diabetes ( P = 0.526), kidney disease ( P = 0.287), and severe liver disease ( P = 0.875), was similar across trajectory patterns, while congestive heart failure showed a trend toward higher prevalence in trajectory 3 (30.0% vs. trajectory 1: 19.2% vs. trajectory 2: 21.9%; P = 0.058).
close to significancep = 0.0581.2× alpha
Mean estimates from the mixed model revealed significant preferential attention to upright biological motion at 3 months (M = 56.4%, 95% CI [52.3–60.5%], p < 0.01), at 5 months (M = 55.4%, 95% CI [51.6–59.1%], p < 0.01), at 9 months (M = 56.6%, 95% CI [52.0–61.1%], p < 0.01), at 15 months (M = 61.8%, 95% CI [58.2–65.4%], p < 0.001), and at 24 months (M = 64.1%, 95% CI [60.5–67.6%], p < 0.001), with preference close to significance at 4 months (M = 53.8%, 95% CI [50.0–57.7%], p = 0.058) (all p -values adjusted for multiple comparisons (7 total) using the Benjamini-Hochberg method 54 , with a false discovery rate of 5%).