“marginally significant”

Human- and membrane-selected populations did not differ in their attraction to worn socks (GLM: F 1,4 = 1.887, P = 0.241; Fig 6C ), However, more membrane-selected females were attracted to human hands than human-selected females (F 1,4 = 14.235, P = 0.020), and there was also a marginally significant difference for attraction to heat packs (F 1,4 = 7.127, P = 0.052).

Controlling for age and sex did not alter findings for the amygdala ( r = −.51, P = .046); however, findings for the vmPFC became marginally significant ( r = −.49, P = .052).

The number of recurrences was 1,591 and 254 in male and female participants, with recurrence rates of 44.2% and 40.0%, respectively; the differences in these rates were marginally significant (P=0.052) ( Table 1 ).

The difference between 0.32 μM and 0.54 μM was marginally significant ( P = 0.052), suggesting a potential threshold effect near 0.5 μM.

There was a similar magnitude reduction in IPV for married adolescents in Arm 3, though the findings were marginally significant (aIRR 0.46, 95% CI 0.21–1.01, p = 0.052).

The interaction between Condition and Group was marginally significant, F (1, 39) = 4.00, p = .052, η p 2 = .09.

Self‐control showed significant positive correlations with RMSSD, pNN50, and HF (0.145 ≤ r s ≤ 0.161), while conscientiousness showed a marginally significant correlation with HF ( r = 0.135, p = 0.052) and significant positive correlations with RMSSD ( r = 0.159, p = 0.022) and pNN50 ( r = 0.166, p = 0.017).

When separating the group of rehabilitated porpoises and comparing the first measurement after arrival in the facility with the last one obtained before release, marginally significant differences (p = 0.052) appear between the first value close to the range of the free-ranging animals and the last value similar to the range found in animals in human care (Figure 3 b).

The completion of treatment was significant in the population (p=0.034), and eradication was marginally significant (p=0.052) (Table 2 ).

The effect was positive and marginally significant in the conservative target condition, b = 0.06, SE = 0.03, t (410) = 1.95, p = .052.

In Model 2 ( Fig 4A ), RAN ( p = .002) and arithmetic ( p < .001) were significant predictors of reading ( R 2 = .42), while grapheme-phoneme processing was marginally significant ( p = .052).

In line with this, a marginally significant decrease in depression measured with the HAM-D (Fig. 3 B) was found for this time period ( t (12) = 1.75, p =.052).

– However, no correlation strength was found between NA/MHMA ROC or AD/MHMA ROCs and high histamine ROC (Table 3 ), but – a marginally significant negative relationship was found between histamine and free Cu/Zn ( n = 134, rho = −1.95, P = 0.052) that was supported on SEM analysis by a negative coefficient between these two variables ( n = 134, z = −1.95, P = 0.052).

Using ANOVA, we found a marginally significant univariate effect of embryonic cold‐temperature regime on tadpole mass ( F 2,27 = 3.3, p = 0.052).

A marginally significant increase in the stress index was observed during the Stroop condition compared to baseline (Wilk's Lambda = 0.84, F [2,34] = 3.236, p = 0.052, η2 = 0.16), suggesting a moderate effect size.

Beta diversity, assessed at the feature level, showed a marginally significant trend ( p = 0.052) and reached significance at the class level ( p = 0.035).

For accuracy , this analysis revealed a marginally significant three-way interaction between frequency, interval, and sleep group [ F (1, 36) = 4.031; p = 0.052; η 2 = 0.101; BF incl = 0.128 (moderate support for H 0 )].

The differences in CV between the groups were marginally significant ( P = 0.052) (Table 3 ).

In univariate analysis, all family members sleeping regularly under bed net was marginally significant (P = 0.052).

There was a marginally significant difference overall in the infection levels among males, females, and subadults (Δdev = 5.9, df = 2, p = 0.052).

When comparing the scores provided by the LIWC, the results of the test indicated that participants came up with marginally significant more negative words in the rumination ( Mdn = 9.31) than in the control condition ( Mdn = 5.26), U = 331.00, z = −1.94, p = .052, while the negativity scores from SentiWordNet were significantly higher in the rumination condition ( Mdn = 0.08) than in the control condition ( Mdn = .05), U = 303.50, z = −2.33, p = .020.

For the group aged ≥80 yr at death, the increase in the CPP of LPC from 4.8% (95% CI 0–10%) in 1962–1976 to 15% (95% CI 9.7–20%) in 2007–2020) was marginally significant ( p = 0.052).

Planned comparisons on the DAS-Total revealed, in spite of a marginally significant, overall effect of group [ F (1,292) = 3.8; p = 0.052], that HCs were comparable to the ALS cohort but scored lower than both PD [ F (1,292) = 4.29; p = 0.039] and HD patients [ F (1,292) = 26.43; p < 0.001].

The between-group difference reached clinically relevant, but marginally significant, reduction in body fat (−4.05 kg 95% CI: −8.14; 0.03, p = 0.052), segmental trunk fat (−1.69 kg 95% CI: −3.50; 0.12, p = 0.067), and WC (−4.36 cm 95% CI: −8.81; 0.082, p = 0.054), favoring the intervention group.

Specifically, there was a marginally significant decrease in we-words from 3 to 2 weeks before the NSSI event ( M decrease = −0.16, SE = 0.08, t = −1.96, p = 0.052), which stayed at a similar frequency level in the week immediately preceding the event.