Also, there was a marginally significant interaction between the Type of Processing and the Type of Test Stimuli, F (1, 30) = 4.07, p = .05, η p 2 = .12.
← all phrases
“marginally significant”
Sighted at
p>=0.1
In the literature
The difference in position errors was, however, marginally significant ( p = 0.05), comparing e pTSO and e pfMO .
732/1619 control subjects, a marginally significant odds ratio (OR) of 1.32 (95% CI 1.12–1.54, p < 0.05) was obtained.
Also, RD showed a marginally significant decrease in left amygdala (p = 0.05).
Nonmetric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) analyses further revealed a marginally significant separation in nematode community composition (based on abundances) between the ambient and warmed treatments ( F 1,39 = 1.69, P = 0.05; Fig. 2B ).
The four factor interactions for object orientations, background orientations, target types and scene consistency was marginally significant, F (4, 156) = 3.814, p = 0.05, η 2 p = 0.089.
A subsequent comparison of the normalized mutant/wild-type ratios ( Figure 6D ) revealed a marginally significant difference (p<0.05) between P23K (0.37 ±0.10) and both D190N (0.64 ±0.18 SD) and P23Y (0.67 ±0.13 SD), but there were no significant differences in the GFP signal intensity between any of the other mutants.
Variables used in the multivariate model were those that had shown a marginally significant (p < 0.05) relation with the perinatal outcomes in univariate analysis.
There was a marginally significant genotype-by-diagnosis interaction (F 2,110 = 3.08, p = 0.050), which appeared to be driven by CUD patients with homozygous CC, who had shorter latencies on unsuccessful Stop trials compared with healthy control participans of the same genotype (F 1,103 = 3.703, p = 0.057).
Nevertheless, hoarseness was found to be marginally significant in cases with hypopharynx involvement ( P =0.05).
The distribution of years of education between groups is marginally significant, X 2 (1) = 3.84, p = 0.050.
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).
On one hand, for intra-subject, statistical test on the performance of deep ConvNet over shallow ConvNet find the statistics Z = −1.923 which is marginally significant ( p = 0.05), where the negative Z shows the shallow ConvNet performs better than deep ConvNet.
In Model 2, this trend persisted, with an OR of 1.41 (95% CI, 0.99–2.01) observed in the highest quartile (Q4), indicating a marginally significant trend (p = 0.05).
an overall trendgold
A marginally significant standardized regression coefficient of b = .362, t (28) = 2.05, p = .05, f = .388, indicated that there was an overall trend for an increase in performance during the memory training.
The difference in early-life fecundity was marginally significant ( F 1,37 = 3.98; p = 0.05).
Patients with decreasing eGFR had higher transgelin levels (median 106.6 versus 83.9 ng/mL), although the difference was marginally significant ( p = 0.05).
However, we found that only one (of eight) species had significantly different larval and adult communities ( p = 0.04, R 2 = 0.53, 5% abundance cut-off, electronic supplementary material, table S1A), and two other species showed marginally significant differences ( p = 0.05, R 2 = 0.22 and p = 0.07, R 2 = 0.28; 5% abundance cut-off , electronic supplementary material, table S1A; results were similar when considering top 5 OTUs).
Whereas the simple main effect of the block was marginally significant in the phone-present condition, F (1.48, 41.42) = 3.53, p = 0.05, η 2 = 0.0498, there were no significant differences between the blocks.
3 A), the pooled analysis for the ECOG = 0 subgroup demonstrated a marginally significant improvement in OS for the vaccines group (HR = 0.73, 95% CI, 0.53–1.00, P = 0.05), and the ECOG = 1 subgroup demonstrated significantly better OS in the vaccines group (HR = 0.80, 95% CI, 0.68–0.95, P = 0.009).
OBs, on the other hand, a somewhat greater and a marginally significant negative interaction was noted (β = −10.85, p = 0.05), indicating that NEML OB prices rose 10.85 units less after deregulation than non-NEML OB prices.
For RDX, the analysis indicated a marginally significant reduction in concentration (W = 12, p = 0.050, Fig. 4 ).
There was, however, a marginally significant interaction between food and the number of rivals (X 2 = 3.96, p = 0.05).
Model 5 in Table 2 shows the marginally significant interaction between search persistence and prosocial motivation (β = −0.20, t = −1.99, p < 0.05), thus supporting Hypothesis 4 .
The evaluation of the product was positively correlated with the health orientation, r (661) = 0.29, p < 0.001, the ecology orientation, r (661) = 0.17, p < 0.001, and the self-perceived knowledge of healthy eating; however, this relation was marginally significant, r (632) = 0.08, p = 0.05.