“marginally significant”

Other findings are similar to model 2 except that the adjusted odds ratio for the birth order ‘2–4’ was marginally significant at the conventional 5% level ( p = 0.051).

Per protocol (PP) analysis Results from 3 × 4 mixed ANOVA revealed significant treatment-by-time interaction effects for all variables analysed, with the exception of behaviour activation, which nevertheless reached a marginally significant level ( p = 0.051) ( Table 8 ).

The main effect of group was significant in the IFG ( F (1, 24) = 10.653, P < 0.01), insula ( F (1, 24) = 7.154, P < 0.05), MTG ( F (1, 24) = 8.112, P < 0.01), and marginally significant in the IPL ( F (1, 24) = 4.205, P = 0.051).

DSM-5 score Analysis of DSM-5 scores showed a marginally significant group × time interaction, F (1, 61) = 3.949, p = 0.051, η 2 = 0.060.

We also found a marginally significant effect on dogs' choices by the −213AG polymorphism [ χ ( 2 ) 2 = 5.948; p = 0.051].

Within a constrained range (scaled V 3 < 0.8), time pressure exhibited a marginally significant interaction with contextual variance ( β = 0.46, s.e. = 0.23, t = 1.95, p = 0.051, standardized coefficient = 0.08, 95% C.I. = [0, .15]) — a pattern consistent with the model prediction of a flatter early noise effect under high time pressure due to early-late noise tradeoff.

We also observed an association of p53 expression with a grade of inflammation that was marginally significant (p = 0.051).

Model 1a (HR ~ time + group + autoregression) fit significantly better than Model 0a (χ 2 (2) = 9.28, p = 0.010), while the difference in the goodness of fit between Model 1a and Model 2a (HR ~ time * group + autoregression) was marginally significant (χ 2 (1) = 3.81, p = 0.051).

The direct effect of C1 became marginally significant when controlling for the mediator (path c’: B = -0.28, SE = 0.14, p = 0.051).

Class 2 (“high‐stable” trajectory; 8% ( n = 785)) consisted of a relatively small sample demonstrating high initial levels of externalizing behavior (raw score of 16.9) at age 9, which exhibited only a marginally significant increase over time (linear slope = 1.07, p = .051).

ANOVA of the number of anticipatory responses indicated significant main effects for block (F(1, 245) = 35.84, MSE = 1.11, p < .001, η 2 p = .128) and exposure (F(1.85, 453.86) = 39.21, MSE = 2.84 (Greenhouse–Geisser correction for deviation from sphericity), p < .001, η 2 p = .138) as well as a marginally significant main effect of UHR status (F(1, 245) = 3.84, MSE = 5.70, p = .051, η 2 p = .015).

There was also a marginally significant three-way interaction between task type, F1, and F2 (b = −0.07, p < 0.051).

Time-Lagged Effects The cross-lagged parameters indicated that age 15 bullying victimization was significantly and positively associated with age 17 suicidal ideation in all tested models ( βs = 0.09–0.10, ps < 0.050), with the exception of models including both anxiety symptoms and alcohol use that showed a marginally significant effect (anxiety symptoms and beer/alcopops model: β = 0.08, p = 0.051; anxiety symptoms and spirits model: β = 0.08, p = 0.055).

The chi-square test of group differences on the dichotomous indicator was significant ( p < 0.05); however, when controlling for income and education as well as baseline CES-D score, there was a marginally significant effect of group condition on EPDS diagnosis outcome (cutoff ≥ 10), B = −6.185, p = 0.051, odds ratio = 0.002, 95% CI = [0.000, 1.018].

A marginally significant difference in mean age was found between the central and peripheral groups ( p =0.051).

The difference in SRS-2 scores between autistic boys and girls was marginally significant ( p = 0.051), and it trended toward more autism symptoms in girls.

Furthermore, we observed a marginally significant association between the Y402H polymorphism and CFH expression in the hippocampus ( P =0.051); however, this significance was lost after multiple testing correction ( P =0.51, after Bonferroni correction).

The main effect of compatibility was marginally significant, F (1, 17) = 4.41, p = .051, and it interacted with spatial Stroop, F (1, 17) = 8.04, p = .011.

This negative association was weaker on the basis of the Spearman correlation coefficient (r s = ‒0.019), although it remained marginally significant ( P = 0.051) ( Figure 8 a).

Nuclear grade 3 tumors showed a marginally significant association with axillary surgery (OR = 3.41, 95% CI: 1.00-11.70, p = 0.051), while younger age (< 40 years) demonstrated a similar trend (OR = 3.16, 95% CI: 0.96–10.37, p = 0.058).

in medium-sized abattoirs was 18.5% (95% CI 9.3–33.6), which was higher compared to other pig abattoirs, with a marginally significant difference ( p = 0.051).

The difference in the AUC values of the ITT was marginally significant ( p = 0.051) between the HFD groups (control vs. cilostazol-treated) ( Figure 1 e). 3.2.

In contrast to hepatocellular carcinoma, there was no observable significance, except for a marginally significant association between −592C > A polymorphism and hepatocellular carcinoma in retrospective studies under the allelic model (OR = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.81–1.00, P = 0.051) and in studied with matched cases and controls under the dominant model (OR = 1.40, 95% CI: 1.00–1.97; P = 0.048).

The main effect of the form of education was marginally significant [ F (1,57) = 3.96, p = 0.051].

The difference in WMHs in deep WM between the dual‐decline and no‐decline groups was marginally significant (β = 0.833, p = .051).