“marginally significant”

Interestingly, the association between active SMU (e.g., posting content) and body dysmorphic symptoms became marginally significant (standardised beta = 0.13; p = 0.019) when controlling for anxiety and depressive symptoms.

Although the difference of adrenal limb thickness was marginally significant between obese and non-obese women, adrenal tumors was more frequently found in obese women compared to non-obese women (P=0.019).

Effects of SSES on RS-EEG microstates The ANOVA results showed that the interactions of SES × SES level were significant for occurrence of MS3 [F (1, 150) = 8.629, p = 0.004, η 2 = 0.055] and marginally significant for contribution of MS3 [F (1, 150) = 5.637, p = 0.019, η 2 = 0.036], while there are no other significant results; the main effects of SES and SES level, as well as the interaction of SES × SES level were not significant for duration of MS3 (See Table 2 ).

For the left IFG and left STG, the models show significant fit and marginally significant fit (left IFG: R 2 = 0.312, p = 0.019, left STG: R 2 = 0.230, p = 0.074).

Independent sample t tests showed a marginally significant effect of phone use for the stair 1 ( t (13.8) = 2.65, p = 0.019, d = 1.17), and significant increases in walking times when using a phone for stairs 2 ( t (22.4) = 4.84, p < 0.001, d = 1.71) and stairs 3 ( t (12.1) = 3.04, p = 0.010, d = 1.48).

While the indirect effects of the overweight/obese body image condition (compared to the athletic thin condition) on AVG ( p = 0.058) and PA motivation ( p = 0.085) via NE were marginally significant, the indirect effects of the average body image condition (compared to the athletic thin condition) on AVG ( p = 0.019) and PA motivation ( p = 0.046) via NE remained significant, indicating the robustness of this particular effect.

melanogaster to conspecific and heterospecific rivals following manipulation of tactile cues When tactile cues were removed by separating males from rivals using porous netting, there was a marginally significant effect of treatment on focal D. melanogaster mating duration (KW χ 5 2 = 13.54 , p = .019; Figure 2 d).

Further, there was a marginally significant enrichment of lipids containing the fatty acids 16:1, 18:1, and 20:3 in their structure (hypergeometric test, p = 1.91 × 10 −2 , 1.35 × 10 −2 and 4.79 × 10 −2 , correspondingly; Figure 2 d; Table S4 ).

4 D), although inter-individual variability resulted in a marginally significant difference ( p = 0.02).

Birds tended to have slightly better yields, with a marginally significant effect over nonavian reptiles ( t = 3.04, P = 0.02).

Latakia also demonstrated a significant positive association with ASD (β = 1.84, 95% CI [.48, 3.19], P = .01) and a marginally significant association with PHQ-9 (β = 1.65, 95% CI [.19, 3.12], P = .02), but no significant association with GAD-7 (β = 1.21, 95% CI [−.21, 2.65], P = .09).

In contrast to the global ancestry estimates noted above, these local ancestry estimates at the MYH9 locus, did show a significant association with non-diabetic ESKD status in the Hispanic American population ( P = 0.0002 for Welch's two-sample t -test, P = 0.0009 for Kolmogorov–Smirnov test) and marginally significant association in the African American population ( P = 0.02 for Welch's two-sample t -test, P = 0.06 for Kolmogorov–Smirnov test).

With respect to Picture Description, for the percentage of nouns, statistically or marginally significant effects were found for patient XTY both pre- ( p = 0.020) and post-treatment ( p = 0.066) and for patient FAY post-treatment ( p = 0.022).

In contrast, the genetic correlation between self-harm phenotypes and chronic pain were relatively weak and either marginally significant or nonsignificant (self-harm ideation: r g [95% CI] = 0.14 [0.05 to 0.22], p = .02; self-harm behavior: r g [95% CI] = 0.13 [0.01 to 0.26], p = .47).

Multi-agent chemotherapy was shown to be linked with a marginally significant increase in overall survival (HR:0.79, p = 0.02) and a marginally significant increase in progression-free survival (PFS) (HR:0.86, p = 0.05) [ 69 ].

The main effect of Singer was small and marginally significant, F(1,64) = 5.8, p < 0.02, η 2 p = 0.08.

As for the fair test 2, the Kruskal–Wallis tests report marginally significant differences in PT ( χ 2 = 7.824, df = 2, p = 0.02) and MET ( χ 2 = 6.600, df = 2, p = 0.037) and significant differences in ET ( χ 2 = 78.111, df = 2, p < 0.001) between score groups.

For AP-Phe-Az and AP-Prop-Tyr, the corresponding theoretical AP proportions tended to be slightly increased, which was found to be marginally significant ( p = 0.02–0.03).

The marginally significant interaction in education gradient in CKD progression by study treatment assignment ( P = 0.02) was in the absence of any overall effect of allocation to simvastatin plus ezetimibe on CKD progression in the study. 14 Highest educational attainment was selected as the primary measure of socioeconomic status because it is less likely than other measures, such as income or employment, to have been influenced by disease at study entry (because it is usually completed in early life, before such disease emerges). 25 Our analyses are therefore unlikely to be susceptible to reverse causality bias.

The per allele effect for TCF7L2 (rs7903146) for affecting blood 25(OH)D concentration was marginally significant Beta ± SE (-0.011, 0.005), P = 0.02, Z score = -2.30, and no association was observed in KCNQ1 (rs2237896) with 25(OH)D concentration Beta ± SE (-0.005, 0.01]), P = 0.26, Z score = -1.18 after adjusting for age, gender, and T2D (Supplementary Table 2 ).

There is a small but marginally significant difference (p = 0.02, t-test) between the mean copy number of the Ethiopian HIV-only and the HIV-TB co-infected cohort, although this is not replicated in the smaller Tanzanian cohort (p = 0.69).

The main effect for stimulus was significant (F = 508.99, df = 1, p < 0.001; BF 10 > 100 “highly favored”), and the main effect of response was marginally significant (F = 5.82, df = 1, p = 0.02; BF 10 = 0.32).

The difference between groups GV (87%) and V (53%) was marginally significant (corrected α = 0.017, Z = 1.99, P = 0.02), though the difference between groups G (67%) and V (53%) was non-significant ( Z = 0.74, P = 0.23), and the difference between groups GV (87%) and G (67%) was not significant either ( Z = 1.29, P = 0.09).

One-way ANOVA comparing scores between each odour group indicated no significant differences in LSAS on day 1 (pre-treatment) and SOS scores, whereas marginally significant differences in age were recorded, with Holm corrected post-hoc tests indicating a difference between the fear and clean air condition ( p = 0.02).

To test for OXT administration effects on ratings, pairwise comparisons showed a marginally significant effect for ratings of neutral images ( Z = −2.32, p = .02), which did not survive the threshold of .009, with lower ratings after OXT ( M = 1.003, SD = 0.90) compared to placebo ( M = 1.25, SD = 0.88).