“close to significance”

Nevertheless, it is important to emphasize that the interaction between trial type and automation was close to significance ( p = .056), so it is possible that our sample was not large enough to reach significance.

All these variables were significant at p < 0.05 (except for experience motivation at p < 0.01), with a value close to significance in the SDI ( p = 0.056), and with higher results in Elementary than Secondary school.

Moreover, we also found a negative correlation between overnight habituation and arousal index close to significance (r s = −0.43, p = 0.056).

This index was higher in spring (97.6%) in comparison to autumn (90.6%), a difference close to significance (Fisher`s Exact Test, p = 0.056).

The score of aggressiveness towards others also evolved inversely to the prolactin level with a p close to significance (p =0.056).

There was no difference between the groups PRE and POST in age, height, and weight; nevertheless, BMI was higher in POST than in PRE, with the difference in BMI z-score close to significance ( p = 0.056).

Similarly, higher anti‐S1 IgG levels were observed in NPT long shedders (2.65 ± 0.05) as compared to non‐long shedders (2.53 ± 0.04), with a statistical difference close to significance ( p = 0.056). 3.6.

For phi metrics, the median of phi tended to be lower at night compared to daytime and was close to significance ( Φ m e d _ d a y = 0.38 ° , Φ m e d _ n i g h t = − 0.81 ° , p = 0.0564).

In terms of ethnicity, a p value close to significance was observed ( p value = 0.05641932) in relation to PFKP for white groups.

The number of anti-inflammatory microglia (TMEM119 + ARG-1 + cells) was similarly reduced in the GemC 12 -LNC group compared to the untreated control ( p = 0.0351) and close to significance for the combination group ( p = 0.0565).

Within the stage 1 group, there was a significant change in breast symmetry scores ( p = 0.02) and nipple to IMF distance changes came close to significance ( p = 0.057).

The total indirect effect via child initiations of treatment transmitted to trial follow‐up CSS was close to significance ( p = .057) and the total overall effect was significant (Wald p = .041, bootstrap CI −0.85 to 0.01).

Similarly, AS women had higher SI values compared to men, but still, the difference was close to significance ( p = 0.057) ( Figure 3 A).

1 G), with statistics close to significance ( p = 0.057).

Although there was no statistically significant difference between the suPAR levels in terms of the response to treatment (among 54 patients receiving immunosuppressive treatment), it was found close to significance since p = 0.057 (p > 0.05).

Improvement in performance for voiced plosives differing by place of articulation was also close to significance (mean change in performance of 8.3%; SD: 11.4%; t (19) = 3.3, p = 0.057).

The analysis of demographic characteristics of the 2 groups highlights few statistical differences: the Body Surface Area (BSA) significantly differs (p = 0.015), and the Body Mass Index (BMI) is close to significance (p = 0.057) as the absolute eosinophil count (p = 0.050).

Differences in complexity were close to significance (F (4,527) = 2.307, p = 0.057).

Receptive vocabulary was close to significance level ( t = 1.92, p = .057) and the contribution of phonological short-term memory was nonsignificant and therefore excluded from the model.

The decrease in BAL eosinophilia was found to be close to significance ( p = 0.0578).

Living in a rural/small town (reference: urban) was marginally significant (ß = −0.872, 95% CI = −1.750 to 0.006, p = 0.052), and the impact of religious affiliation, specifically belonging to other religions (reference: none/agnostic/atheist), remained close to significance (ß = 3.388, 95% CI = −0.120 to 6.897, p = 0.058).

No significant association was observed between Chao1 index and T3 compared to T1 of baseline CQI, whereas Simpson index shown a p -value trend slightly close to significance ( p = 0.058) ( Figure 1 ).

The interaction between context and HC use was close to significance, F (1, 81) = 3.69, p = .058.

The effect of scrambling level was close to significance, F (3,30) = 2.786, P = 0.058, η 2 p = 0.042.

For LDL size, the interaction was significant for model 1 ( p = 0.027) and model 2 ( p = 0.029), and a tendency close to significance for model 3 ( p = 0.058) and model 4 ( p = 0.068).