“marginally significant”

Furthermore, a marginally significant effect of appearance on likability was found ( F 3,129 =2.63, P =.05, η p 2 =0.061).

Cytoplasmic PER fluorescence also cycled in FB cells (Table 2 ) and SG cells (Table 3 ) with troughs at AZT 7, which were highly significant when compared to the preceding point AZT 1 ( P < 0.01 for both cell types) and marginally significant when compared to the following point AZT 19 ( P = 0.05 for either cell type).

Additionally, analysis of sham rTMS studies showed a marginally significant decrease in YGTSS compared to baseline (MD = -4.39; 95% CI: [-8.75, -0.03], P = 0.050, I 2 = 0%; Figure 2A ).

For those aged < 70 years, only a marginally significant correlation was found ( B = − 0.047, 95% CI − 0.095 to 0.000, P = 0.05) (Fig. 4 a).

Although the main effect of time on SE was marginally significant ( p = 0.050), the effect size (η 2 p = 0.429) was large, and the observed power was approximately 0.75, suggesting that the conclusion is relatively reliable.

Regarding physical performance, lower-limb strength and the sit-and-reach test score increased significantly in the intervention group, whereas a significant decrease in grip strength and a marginally significant decrease in 6-minute walking distance ( P = 0.05) were observed in the control group; each of these changes was significantly different from the corresponding change in the other group.

With the exception of the non-significant difference between the DMN and the single system ( X 2 = 2.54 p = 0.1) and the DMN and the δ-Single between-network connectivity (X 2 = 1.53 p = 0.2) which was likely explained by the relatively large overlap between the DMN and the single system, the results showed that the difference between the fc-behavior correlation coefficients of the two sets of networks was significant (or marginally significant) (Single-SMN: X 2 = 3.6, p< 0.05; Single-VN: X 2 = 5.69, p< 0.05; β-Single –DMN: X 2 = 4.78 p< 0.05; β-Single –SMN: X 2 = 6.64 p< 0.01; β-Single –VN: X 2 = 9.56 p< 0.01; δ-Single – SMN:: X 2 = 3.38 p = 0.06; δ-Single – SMN:: X 2 = 5.52 p< 0.05).

A main effect of form of script was marginally significant (F (1,46) = 4.02, p≤.05, η p 2 = .08), and the estimated marginal means suggested that the pointed script (mean = 346.40, SE = 2.95) elicited delayed amplitudes in comparison to the unpointed script (mean = 342.56, SE = 2.88).

There was a marginally significant difference in the percentage receiving surgery in the high-LMR groups vs low-LMR group ( P = 0.05) as well as in race between both groups ( P = 0.05).

Additionally, the self-ratings of olfactory function showed a marginally significant correlation with the ratings of association-subscale (ρ 199 = 0.14, P = 0.05).

Significant clustering is defined as critical ( p < 0.01), marginally significant (0.01 ≤ p ≤ 0.05), or not significant ( p > 0.05).

The analysis returned a significant effect of group, F (2, 28) = 5.755, p = 0.008, η p 2 = 0.291, and a marginally significant interaction between group and emotion category, F (10, 140) = 1.897, p = 0.05, η p 2 = 0.119 (Fig. 3 , top panel).

However, a marginally significant main effect of feature, F (2,57) = 3.15, p = 0.05, ƞ p 2 = 0.10, and an interaction of feature and instruction was found, F (2,57) = 8.72, p < 0.001, ƞ p 2 = 0.23.

In comparison to the reference population, the distribution of blood groups among all SARS-CoV-2 seropositive individuals was different (marginally significant; p = 0.05) ( Table 2B ).

There was a marginally significant difference, however, between [ 18 F]-FTP uptake isolated to the entorhinal cortex among players in age-, position-, and race-adjusted models ( p = 0.05) that may represent an area of future investigation.

Compared with CON, MBE demonstrated a marginally significant effect on improving CE (SMD = 0.97, 95% CI [-0.02, 1.95], P = 0.05), though with considerable heterogeneity across studies (I2 = 79%); HIIT demonstrated markedly superior improvements (SMD = 3.06, 95% CI [2.06, 4.05], P < 0.00001); CT also demonstrated significant efficacy (SMD = 2.17, 95% CI [0.98

There was a marginally significant difference for composite endpoint HIV/AIDS related event or death or WHO Stage II/III (HR = 0.65, 95% CI 0.42, 1.01, p-value = 0.05).

However, a marginally significant correlation was obtained between age and change in treatment quality ( p = 0.050).

Significant or marginally significant sex differences were found for SC scores on the SCWT for the CC genotype and SCW scores on the SCWT for the TT genotype (Table 4 , t = –2.009, –3.163; p = 0.050, 0.019, respectively), which are both consistent (SC) and different (SCW) from the results of the above comparisons of SCWT and HVLT-R scores between males and females with all genotypes.

The characteristics of the two groups were similar, with a marginally significant difference in their distribution ( P > 0.05).

In terms of subtype analysis, although the efficacy of the PD-1 inhibitor on acral melanoma patients was marginally significant ( p = 0.05) as compared to the conventional therapy group (IFN+OBS), we still reached a non-statistically significant result, wehile the non-significance among the three groups in DMFS could be caused by the inherently poor outcome of PD-1 inhibitors in BRAF-mutant metastatic melanoma patients in real-world clinical practice [ 36 ].

During follow-up, 13 patients died (11 in the EBL group and 2 in the EVO group); the survival rate was marginally significant between two groups ( P =0.050).

Age had a marginally significant correlation with traumatic events at baseline only ( p = .05).

There were no significant associations in the final adjusted model, though income was marginally significant ( p = 0.05).

Adding best corrected visual acuity (measured in logMAR (negative decadic logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution)) to the model showed a marginally significant association with self-rated depression scores ( P = 0.05; beta: 0.04; B: 1.56; 95%CI: -0.01, 3.13).