“marginal significance”

Although this difference is not statistically significant, it shows marginal significance ( p = 0.076).

Both the full sample and the analyses with the sample of non-loss seekers illustrated the marginal significance of the main effect of Frame ( β = 0.813, p = 0.076) and the non-significant main effects for Group ( β = 0.014, p = 0.979) and Gender ( β = -0.189, p = 0.640).

The contingency table revealed marginal significance ( P = 0.076) for the first-generation demographic in Class 3, which was the only class to have more students classified as first generation than continuing generation.

NRS pain scores had improved compared to the control group at post-visit 5, with marginal significance ( p = .076) and a moderate effect size (ω 2 = 0.095) (see Tables 2 and 3 ).

Being a GA patient was associated with a slightly higher risk of referral for a secondary dental GA in the recall period at a marginal significance level of 10% (OR 5.51; 95% CI 0.83, 36.46, p = .076).

After adjusting for age and stage, the clustering pattern showed marginal significance as an independent prognostic factor (HR 0.33; CI 0.10–1.12; P = 0.076).

WM volume showed marginal significance after full adjustment (p=0.076), while no significant associations were found for parietal lobe, WMH volume, or DTI metrics in the fully adjusted model.

After applying HC3 standard errors, the significance of three key interaction terms was attenuated from p < 0.05 to marginal significance ( p = 0.076–0.091), while the significance of the other main effects remained unchanged.

Additionally, students in the non-exposure with pop culture group ( M = 3.53, SD = 0.62, N = 47) reported lower learning satisfaction compared to students in the non-exposure with traditional case group ( M = 3.79, SD = 0.56, N = 21), with this difference representing marginal significance ( F = 3.15, p = 0.076, η 2 = 0.046).

However, haplotype GCT for markers rs220168-rs220170-rs11911271 showed marginal significance (empirical P = 0.076; SE ≤ −12D for cases), but could not be replicated in the follow-up study.

With marginal significance, patients with elevated GPS showed a tendency toward shorter PFS (HR = 1.755, 95% CI: 0.943–3.265, P = 0.076, Table 3 ; Figure 3 ).

In a second analysis with smoking status and tumour size, again a marginal significance for size was noticed ( P =0.0763; OR (95% CI): 1.02 (0.99–1.04)), whereas smoking status was not associated with FGFR1 amplification ( P =0.3890; OR (95% CI): 2.5 (0.31–20.1)).

The logistic models indicated that survival of bream was lower at higher rotations with marginal significance ( p = 0.077) (Fig. 2 and Supplementary Table S1 ).

In addition, older individuals showed marginal significance between good and bad selections in the last block (block 4: t = 1.81, p = 0.077), and slightly improved their decisions over time (block 4 versus block 1: t = 1.96, p = 0.055).

In order to evaluate the hypothesis, the relative angle in LAO 30° view was measured for each patient ( Figure 3A and B ), finding that the LBBP-ARC group had a larger relative angle than the LBBP-alone group with marginal significance (22.2 ± 11.5° vs. 18.1 ± 11.4°, P = 0.077) ( Figure 3C ).

The mean values of RFS were 21 and 14 months in ascites cholesterol levels < 70 mg/dL and ≥ 70 mg/dL groups, showing marginal significance ( p = 0.077) (Fig. 7 ).

A t-test of the log-transformed data showed marginal significance ( p = 0.077).

When applying the Hodges formula, maximal change in QTc interval was higher in the ramosetron group with a marginal significance (mean difference 8.81 ms, 95 % CI −0.99–18.61, P = 0.077).

There was marginal significance ( p = 0.077) in heterogeneity and Higgins’ I 2 was 38.5% ( Fig 2b ).

A marginal significance was detected among those aged <60 years regarding the association of the rs1135216 AG/GG genotype with PTB risk (OR = 1.97, 95% CI 0.93–4.19, P = 0.077).

In 1‐sample MR analysis within the DFTJ cohort, we did not observe any causal association of aspartylphenylalanine with incident ACS (OR [95% CI], 0.92 [0.69–1.22]; P =0.554; Table 3 ), but in 2‐sample MR analysis, we found that aspartylphenylalanine level was significantly causally associated with higher SBP (β [95% CI], 0.08 [0.01–0.15]; P =0.024; Table S11 ) and hypertension risk (β [95% CI], 1.04 [1.02–1.06]; P =0.001; Table S11 ), and with higher serum triglyceride level with a marginal significance (β [95% CI], 0.16 [−0.02 to 0.34]; P =0.077; Table S11 ), whereas pleiotropy assessment was not applicable as only 2 genetic instruments were used (Tables S11 and S12 ).

EGC was negatively associated with snoring in the univariate analysis but only showed marginal significance in the multivariate analysis (OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.16 to 1.10; p = 0.077).

Higher competence thwarting contributed to increased emotional exhaustion for Chinese literature teachers (β = 0.15, t = 2.23, p = .026) and EFL teachers (β = 0.50, t = 2.65, p = .008), with marginal significance for mathematics teachers (β = 0.13, t = 1.77, p = .077).

Tumor mRNA level of PDGFRB was significantly associated with serum PDGF-BB (R = 0.395, p = 0.009) and marginal significance with serum PDGF-AA ( p = 0.077; Figure S1D,H ). 2.4.

The Child Pugh score was not statistically different between the RT and non-RT groups, although there was marginal significance ( P = 0.077).