“marginally significant”

ER-positive status was found in 98.8% of ILCs versus 86.6% of IDCs (p<0.01), and PR-positive status was found in 82.9% of ILCs and in 73.0% of IDCs, with a marginally significant difference (p=0.05).

Safety measures during smog episodes were marginally significant with a coefficient of 0.34 (SE = 0.17), (OR = 1.40; 95% CI: 1.00–1.98; p = 0.050), indicating that adherence to these measures could potentially reduce risk of COPD.

However, this result was marginally significant at the p < 0.05 level.

A marginally significant effect was observed in the comparison of the groups of subjects (F(2,20) = 3.34, p = 0.05, η 2 p = 0.25).

A marginally significant interaction ( p = 0.05) was detected for this region.

les were significantly associated with suicidal ideation: we highlighted a protective role of enrolment before lockdown ( Table 4 , OR = 0.56 [0.4–0.78], p < 0.001; meaning that before lockdowns, the risk of suicidal ideation was halved with respect to after restrictive measures were effective) and marginally significant protection linked to enrolment during lockdown (OR = 0.58, [0.36–0.95], p < 0.05).

The main effect of Group was marginally significant ( F (1, 32) = 4.14, p = 0.050) reflecting slower naming times in the DLD ( M = 1404 ms, SD = 422 ms) than in the TD group ( M = 1177 ms, SD = 370 ms).

Women who binge eat displayed negative correlations between self-reported motor impulsiveness score and accuracy rates in different conditions (HHH: r = -0.41, p = 0.02; LHL: r = -0.46, p = 0.01; LLL: r = -0.47, p = 0.01), though a marginally significant correlation was observed (HLH: r = -0.35, p = 0.05).

The difference to the private condition was marginally significant ( t (60) = 1.98, p = .05, 95% [-0.01, 1.15], d = 0.254).

The same pattern was true for first winter survival with the quadratic effect of maternal age being marginally significant when birth weight was removed (χ 2 1 = 3.85, p = 0.050).

There were also significant differences in the median HR ratio among sub-groups ( p <0.001) except for between grade 2 and 3 steatosis, which was marginally significant ( p = 0.05) (Fig. 4 ).

The analysis revealed significant differences in survival curves between the groups at 30-day (Log-rank p = 0.017; Figure 2A ) and 90-day (Log-rank p = 0.045; Figure 2B ), and a marginally significant difference at 1-year (Log-rank p = 0.050; Figure 2C ).

However, possibly owing to a small sample size, the effect of single embryo transfer only reached a borderline significant effect for ongoing pregnancy (OR = 0.4; 95% CI: 0.1, 1.0; P = 0.05) and a marginally significant effect for live birth (OR = 0.4; 95% CI: 0.1, 1.0; P = 0.06) (Table III ).

Compared to the extended team period (0.64), there was a marginally significant reduction in cardiac arrest of nonmedical ward patients ( P = .05).

In the CCD dogs, the difference in %Aβ area between grey matter and white matter was marginally significant ( p = 0.05, Mann-Whitney) ( Table 2 ), thereby supporting the finding of the Aβ plaques being primarily present in the grey matter, and especially in the deep cortical layer V and VI.

Differences between treated and non-treated control samples were considered not significant ( P ≥ 0.05), marginally significant ( P < 0.05) ∗ , or significant ( P < 0.01) ∗∗ .

We also found that, overall, participants were faster when responding to Arrows than Eyes, however this effect was marginally significant, since it was at our defined threshold for statistical significance ( β = −0.16, t = −2.02, p = .050).

Two-way ANOVA showed no main effect of locomotion (F (1,7) = 4.05, P = 0.084) but revealed a marginally significant locomotion × frequency interaction (F (1,7) = 5.59, P = 0.050).

1 a) and a marginally significant effect on average spot size ( t = 1.97, p = 0.05) (Fig. 1 b).

This finding was validated by western blot at protein level (Figures 4 C,D) finding marginally significant differences when comparing risk and protective genotypes at basal levels ( p = 0.05), but not after stimulation.

Among the methods of intervention, blended interventions combining face-to-face and online approaches showed significant effects (SMD: 0.25, 95% CI: 0.15 to 0.35, P < 0.001), followed by face-to-face interventions, which demonstrated marginally significant effects (SMD: 0.17, 95% CI: 0.00 to 0.34, P = 0.05).

The statistical interaction between dose and density was marginally significant for day of death ( H = 7.813, df = 3, p = 0.05; Figure 1B ) with tadpoles exposed to Dose 3 dying significantly earlier in low density tanks but not when held in high density conditions ( Figure 1B , Table S1 ). 3.

Statistical significance was evaluated with a two-sided significance level of 0.05 ( p ≥ 0.05 and < 0.10 were considered marginally significant).

Oyster survival We found marginally significant differences (χ 2 = 7.66, df = 3, p = 0.05) in oyster survival among the sites from May 2018 – May 2019.

However, post hoc analyses demonstrated only a marginally significant difference between the seated stairwell control and stair walking groups ( p = 0.05, MD = 31.17, 95% CI = −0.3 to 62.36).