In multi-model inference, the best model of NMDS1 contained both PC1 ( Figure 7 ) and PC2, and was negatively associated with both (although PC2 was marginally non-significant), explaining 94.65% of the variance in NMDS1 ( b (PC1) = 0.294, t 12 = −14.40, p < 0.001; b (PC2) = 0.0783, t 12 = −2.16, p = 0.051).
The interaction was previously significant or marginally non-significant in models 3 ( P = 0.004), 5t ( P = 0.07), and 5i ( P = 0.06).
(b) Trait-by-trait divergence The first and last samples of lineage II were significantly different for 12 of 16 traits at the p < 0.003 level; a 13th trait was marginally non-significant with p = 0.005 ( figure 2 and table 1 ).
CFQ Initial CFQ analysis showed an acceptable overall model fit with a marginally non-significant item–trait chi-squared statistic [χ 2 (33) = 48.06, P = 0.044).
Wasps were also more abundant by a marginally non-significant amount in yellow traps compared with white traps (t 7.0 = 2.93, p = 0.05).
Furthermore, gossypol caused a 3.44-fold rise in p62 protein levels, but ponatinib demonstrated a marginally non-significant increase ( P > 0.05).
Line 145-146: Can the authors provide any more specifics regarding what type of shark deterrents (e.g., magnetic, electrical, etc.) or make/model were used? Line 159: Marginally non-significant when p>0.05 (p = 0.068).
The variables examined were: aerobic capacity for exercise, lung function, anxiety and depression, with non-significant improvement for the MRC Dyspnea scale, marginally non-significant improvement regarding 6MWT ( p = 0.05) and significant improvement for FEV1 ( p < 0.05).
However, the mediation effect was marginally non-significant (β = −0.04, p < 0.05, 95% CI [−0.08, 0.00]).
However, for l -leucine, there was a marginally non-significant difference in the detection threshold between oxygen concentrations ( n =8, F 2,18 =3.74, P =0.05).
A meta-analysis of six randomized controlled trials investigating the efficacy of incorporating VR into PR for patients with COPD noted that VR enhanced the therapeutic effects of PR with significant improvements in FEV1 ( p < 0.05) and marginally non-significant improvements in 6MWT ( p = 0.05) [ 84 ].
The effect on muscle mass, measured by skeletal muscle index, was marginally non-significant (SMD 0.25 ±0.13, 95% CI –0.006–0.51, p = 0.05), and no significant effect on appendicular skeletal muscle mass or muscle performance (measured by walking speed) was observed [ 84 ].
The variables examined were: aerobic capacity for exercise, lung function, anxiety and depression, with non-significant improvement for the MRC Dyspnea scale, marginally non-significant improvement regarding 6MWT ( p = 0.05) and significant improvement for FEV1 ( p < 0.05).
Further, when patients were dichotomized based on the disease control rate (“DCR”), a significantly longer OS was exhibited in the disease control compared to no-disease control group according to PERCIST (p = 0.01), PERCIMT (p = 0.01) and iPERCIST (p = 0.01), while a similar, marginally non-significant trend was also observed after application of EORTC (p = 0.05).
At 0.05 μg/mL CTX, the t-test result shows a marginally non-significant difference (at p < 0.05) in the filamentary frequency of co-culture (M = 0.76133, SD = 0.0647) and monoculture (M = 0.508, SD = 0.1445), t (n-1 = 2) = 2.7714, p = 0.050259.
20.80 ± 2.55), the difference was marginally non-significant ( p = 0.050).
As shown in Table 10 , the Gray test yielded a marginally non-significant P = 0.050 (unrounded P = 0.0501 ), suggesting insufficient evidence for prognostic differences among subtypes.
Contrary to expectations that synapsids would follow a consistently optimal path toward a more therian morphology, our results based on reconstructed landscapes for major nodes show statistically significant fluctuations in optimality across the major synapsid groups (with marginally non-significant effects of centroid size; RPPP ANOVA, p < 0.05, see S7 Table ).
The DASS-21 subscale for stress was used and the results indicate that use of the PsyCovidApp could be correlated with a marginally non-significant reduction in the stress score (MD: 0.06; CI: −0.14–0.01; p = 0.05).
The Wilcoxon test showed that the difference in FSS-7 score was marginally non-significant (p = 0.05, effect size = 0.37).
This association, however, weakens and becomes marginally non-significant in the multivariate model (β = 0.13, p = 0.051), suggesting that gender differences in health behaviors may be influenced by other demographic and health factors.
Cox regression analysis showed a significant reduction in the incidence of all-cause mortality or first HFH in the IA cohort with a marginally non-significant hazard ratio (HR 0.51; 95%CI 0.26–1.00; p = 0.051, Figure 4 ) compared to CU patients.
However, there was a marginally non-significant correlation between NPI apathy and DAS EmA ( p = 0.051, r = 0.303).
Snails from SH-2 showed similar patterns, but these results were marginally non-significant ( figure 2 b ; electronic supplementary material, table S4; p = 0.051).
This relationship remained significant in model 1 (OR = 1.584, 95% CI: 1.326 to 1.891, P < 0.0001) and model 2 (OR = 1.385, 95% CI: 1.162 to 1.651, P = 0.001), but was marginally non-significant in the fully adjusted model 3 (OR = 1.218, 95% CI: 0.999 to 1.485, P = 0.051).