“marginally significant”

Myocardial infarction occurrence was marginally significant (P = 0.05), observed in one patient in Group SA, one in Group MA, and two in Group TA.

Regarding survey factors, the 3rd survey (2019) showed a marginally significant increase in the likelihood of being highly annoyed compared to the 1st survey ( p ≤ 0.05), while the 4th survey (2023) did not show a statistically significant difference.

Additionally, patients using opioids performed worse on memory than those using cannabis, which was marginally significant [M diff = 0.96 (SD = 0.35), P = 0.05].

In contrast, in the Passive group, the difference between X and Y was marginally significant only on session block 9, but in the opposite, noncompetitive direction (X > Y) ( t (266) = 1.97, p = 0.05).

Additionally, for success ratio, interaction analysis for model 4 reveals a marginally significant positive effect of total progress pictures ( P =.05).

Similarly, the reductions in KK IG subjects were significantly greater compared to the CG subjects (respectively, FSI: P =0.026, HOMA-IR: P =0.039), and HbA1c reduction were marginally significant ( P =0.050).

Meta-analysis of OER The pooled analysis of 4 studies (n = 235) showed a marginally significant benefit for acupuncture (OR = 2.18, 95% CI [0.99, 4.80]; I 2=0%; P = .05; Fig. 7 ).

Low educational attainment was marginally significant ( P = .05) in indicating approximately 1.7 additional unhealthy days, and a medium level of community poverty was independently significant in indicating approximately 1.4 additional unhealthy days in comparison to those living in a more affluent community.

Desktop chat had a nonsignificant negative effect on confidence compared with mobile phone (beta=−.210, P =.11), and mobile phone chat was marginally significant with a positive effect (beta=−.255, P =.05).

This difference was marginally significant (χ 2 = 3.77, df = 1, P = 0.05).

While the direct effect of anxiety was strongly significant ( β = 0.341**, p < 0.01), a marginally significant indirect effect (0.054*, p < 0.05) suggested weak complementary mediation.

Total aboveground dead and live biomass was not significantly different in unburned and burned plots, but there were marginally significant increases in standing dead biomass in the 10–19.9 and 20–29.9 cm DBH size classes (p<0.05, Figure 3 ).

For measures of latency noise, correlations between RT and TOJ tasks and between TOJ and 2xSJ tasks were marginally significant (one-tailed bootstrap p < 0.05).

For hot EF tasks , as can be seen in Table 8 , in the affective reversal learning task, children made fewer regression errors than adults, with this difference being marginally significant ( p = 0.05).

As we examined the collective effect of marginally significant SNPs and found enrichment in two autoimmune diseases in the PS approach, here we focused our analysis on SNPs with at least nominally significant P values ( P < 0.05).

The interaction between size and material for LF1 st was, however, marginally significant (F(1,27) = 4.15, p = .05, partial eta 2 = .13), indicating a degree of non-independence in the way that size and material properties influence our lifting forces.

Microcalcification on mammography was seen in 41.3% (19/46) of patients in the non-upgrade group and in 77.8% (7/9) of patients in the upgrade group, which indicated a marginally significant difference (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).

15 There was only a small (although marginally significant, P = 0.05) difference in the total proportion of confirmed cases by colposcopy (74.6% versus 72.9%) for VIA and Pap respectively.

The difference between switch and non-switch trials was marginally significant in the passive control group, F (1,56) = 4.02, p = 0.050, ƞ p 2 = 0.067 and non-significant in the active control group, F (1,56) < 1.

On this measure, there was only one instance in which this test was marginally significant ( p = 0.05): namely, when availability was regressed on measures of governance (i.e., specificity of national mental health plans and legislation), without the inclusion of HDI as a covariate.

Second, although the analysis of negative control outcomes showed a marginally significant association between semaglutide 2.4 mg use and sensorineural hearing loss (HR: 1.09, 95% CI: 1.01–1.17; p < 0.05), the effect size is small and above 1, suggesting that even if weak residual confounding exists in the current study, it would likely bias our findings from the main analyses conservatively toward the null.

Despite concerns about possible adverse effects of statin therapy on heart failure [ 31 ], the non-significant trend toward fewer heart failure deaths due to any cause (70 [0.7%] vs 86 [0.8%]; RR 0.81 [0.59–1.10]; p = 0.2) is supported by a marginally significant reduction in first hospital admission for worsening heart failure or heart failure death (354 [3.4%] vs 405 [3.9%]; RR 0.86 [0.75–1.00]; p = 0.05).

Results of reaction time also showed a marginally significant Duration × Typicality interaction ( F 1,5 = 6.34, p = .05) – the typicality effect (RT difference: atypical minus typical) was numerically greater for 40-msec displays (138 msec) than for 600-msec displays (46 msec).

Nevertheless, in statistical terms only observed heterozygosity was in fact significantly higher (Kolmogorov-Smirnoff test: p<0.01), all the other differences were either not or marginally significant (p<0.05).