marginally non-significantp = 0.056
Although marginally non-significant, households using rainwater source for drinking had increased risk of STH infection aOR = 3.14 (95%CI: 0.97–10.17); p = 0.056.
Although marginally non-significant, households using rainwater source for drinking had increased risk of STH infection aOR = 3.14 (95%CI: 0.97–10.17); p = 0.056.
clavigera treatment; however, these results were found to be marginally non-significant ( p = 0.056) compared to other treatments.
The analysis revealed marginally non-significant differences across groups (F (3,20) = 2.84, P = 0.056).
However, this trait also showed some variation, as seeds from Fielder grown under the dual stress were marginally non-significant compared to control conditions ( p = 0.056), but there was a lower K concentration compared to the other lines, which all showed increased K levels.
A marginally non-significant small-study effect was also observed for the MD of the left OCW ( p = 0.0566).
Higher stocking densities also seemed to provoke diseases, though the association was marginally non-significant ( p = 0.057).
An analysis of the CD4 T cells and γδ-T cells (γδ-TCR) labelling in the uteri showed similar but marginally non-significant effects of the group on this response ( p = 0.057 and p = 0.059, respectively).
Interestingly, frass produced was negatively correlated with SOD ( r = −0.310, p = 0.038), but had marginally non-significant negative correlation with APX ( r = −0.286, p = 0.057).
Job physical effort was marginally non-significant ( p = 0.057).
A marginally non-significant association was observed between the rs2078178 A allele and UC (P=0.0573; OR 1.543, 95%CI 1.005-2.368).
Marginally non-significant bias was found for DBP (−2.2 ± 8.0 [−4.5, 0.1] mmHg, P = 0.058; R 2 : 0.66; ±10/±15 mmHg agreements: 78%, 96%).
However, the Chi-squared test comparing age groups revealed a marginally non-significant result ( P = 0.058), which could be explained by the limited sample size and the method of age-group categorization.
trichiura (prevalence from 19.4% to 11.7%, OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.26–0.73, p = 0.0040) and a marginally non-significant reduction in odds of infection of Strongyloides spp (prevalence from 4.3% to 1.6%, OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.12–0.89, p = 0.058) in the IVM-1 arm ( Supplementary Table S3 ).
Differences between populations for proportion female were marginally non-significant (Kruskal-Wallis test, p = 0.058, S6B Table , Table 5 ) with the population selected at 3.0 mg thymol having the highest proportion females.
Gender (male) showed a marginally non-significant negative association with tobacco use (B = −0.017, SE = 0.009, 95% CI [−0.035, 0.001], p = 0.058).
Conversely, the war period was associated with significantly lower odds of 30-day mortality compared to the non-war period (OR = 0.14, 95%CI [0.02–0.69], p = 0.026), with a similar trend observed for in-hospital mortality, although the latter was marginally non-significant (OR = 0.13, 95%CI [0.01–0.91], p = 0.058).
Breeding success and productivity were also lower for birds based on field monitoring estimates compared to using field-corrected GPS data, although these differences were marginally non-significant (success: X 2 = 1.22, d.f. = 2, p = 0.059; productivity: X 2 = 0.79, d.f. = 2, p = 0.077; figure 2 b , c ).
We included a year of sampling as a fixed effect in all models and found that all the immune traits varied significantly between years (LRT P < 0.001), apart from IL-4 where the year was marginally non-significant ( χ 2 = 7.43, Degrees of Freedom (DF) = 3, P = 0.059).
When the RAR was analyzed by quartiles, compared to the lowest quartile (Q1, reference), Q2 showed significantly increased odds of PD in the crude model (OR = 1.65, 95% CI: 1.09–2.50, p = 0.018) and Model 1 (OR = 1.56, 95% CI: 1.02–2.36, p = 0.039), but this association became marginally non-significant in Model 2 (OR = 1.49, 95% CI: 0.99–2.27, p = 0.059) and Model 3 (OR = 1.48, 95% CI: 0.96–2.30, p = 0.076).
A two-factor ANOVA with the between-subject factors “modality” and “processing” revealed a marginally non-significant interaction of both conditions [ F (2, 85) = 2.936, p = 0.059, η = 0.065].
Furthermore, there was a similar but marginally non-significant difference between the two groups in functional well-being score ( p = 0.059) and FACT-HEP total score ( p = 0.061) in the second month ( Fig. 5 ).
The baseline UI stage was marginally non-significant ( p = 0.059), while age, BMI, and time to rehabilitation were not statistically significant predictors. 4.
For the proximity scores extracted from the random forest trained to predict bond group, belonging to the same bond group was a marginally non-significant predictor of call similarity (gamma regression, χ 2 = 3.5, p = 0.060) and genetic relatedness was not significant (gamma regression, χ 2 = 0.133, p = 0.715) (electronic supplementary material, figure S2, table 3 ). 4.
Patients with an increase in BI during geriatric hospital treatment had a marginally non-significant lower number of uncompensated problems (5.6 vs. 7.2; p = 0.06) than those with no change or decrease in BI.
VEGF and CD had a moderate positive, marginally non-significant correlation (r = 0.34; p = 0.06), and 12% of CD was related to VEGF (r 2 = 0.12).