Barely Significant
← all phrases

“marginally significant”

26,083 sentences · 26,083 papers · 36,483 search hits before verification · confirmed specimen

Sighted at

p>=0.1

Listed by Hankins (2013) · Otte et al. (2022)

In the literature

marginally significantp = .0501.0× alphagold
Post-hoc analyses of this interaction revealed a marginally significant influence of the QSS slope trend estimates for the abstract ( emtrend = 0.84, SE = 0.42, t = 1.99, p = .050) but not for the realistic ( emtrend = −0.33, SE = 0.42, t = −0.78, p = .439) 3D landmark visualization conditions.
marginally significantp = 0.051.0× alphagold
The intervention period of less than 6 weeks improved the response time to a certain extent, showing a marginally significant effect (SMD = −0.68, p = 0.05), while the intervention period exceeding 6 weeks did not make the response time reach statistical significance (SMD = −1.03, p > 0.07).
highly significantp < 0.051.0× alphaqualifiedgold
marginally significantp = 0.0561.1× alphagold
One-way ANOVA ( n = 3, since each of the NDVI scans for corn or cotton was done with three replicates) indicated that, except for corn under full irrigation on June 11 that exhibited a marginally significant diurnal change ( p = 0.056), five other diurnal courses of NDVI for corn/cotton all showed significant or highly significant diurnal trends ( p < 0.05).
marginally significantp = 0.051.0× alphagold
The result reflects that there is no difference in age, sex, employment status, monthly income level, marital status, cause of disability, caregiver(s), or residence, but there was significant difference in long-term control medication ( χ 2 = 14.67, p < 0.001) and marginally significant in education level( χ 2 = 9.41, p = 0.05).
marginally significantp = .0501.0× alphagold
A 2 (context) × 2 (relative outcome magnitude) × 2 (valence) repeated measure analysis of variance (ANOVA) conducted on the response time (RT) for making the initial choice in the trial following presentation of outcomes, yielded a marginally significant effect of valence factor, F(1, 17) = 4.456, p = .050, with a longer response time after wins (769.495±378.808 ms) than after losses (649.482±227.666 ms).
marginally significantp = 0.051.0× alphagold
However, for CHD death, the pooled effect size showed a marginally significant ( p = 0.05) 7% reduction in CHD death for the n-3 PUFA intervention groups, an outcome which included sudden cardiac death, deaths due to ventricular arrhythmias and heart failure in patients with CHD, as well as deaths occurring after coronary revascularization or heart transplant.