“marginally significant”

In terms of infant birth weight, higher prenatal maternal anxiety was significantly associated with lower infant birth weight for male infants (β = −0.230, SE = 0.101, p = .022) and marginally significant for female infants (β = −0.223, SE = 0.117, p = .055).

p ]The mean 1-back latency in the older group was lower after green tea extract and this change was marginally significant (P = 0.055), but no significant change was observed in the younger group (P = 0.77).

The interaction term age ∗ sex was marginally significant ( F 2,39 = 3.13, p = 0.055); mRC3 expression was higher in adult females compared to adult males ( p = 0.0099; Figure 4C ). mRC4 expression did not vary with age ( p = 0.68), sex ( p = 0.77), or their interaction ( p = 0.088; Figure 4D ).

Data of two participants (one LL- and one UL-CRPS) were identified as influential (Cook’s distance > 0.15) 43 and had been removed from this analysis, however, retaining them in the data resulted in a consistent but marginally significant correlation ( p = 0.055; Supplementary Figure S6 ).

Anemia was more common in AIDS patients (41/52 (78.8%)) than others, this difference was marginally significant ( P -value=0.055).

The main effect of disparities is marginally significant ( F (7 , 10) = 2.245, P = 0.055, η p 2 = 0.183).

Lower erythrocyte level showed a marginally significant association with macular oedema [beta-coefficient = −0.86, P value = 0.055].

However, the overall regression model for perceived effectiveness of the default nudge was marginally significant ( p = .055).

There was a marginally significant interaction between presentation order and group [ F (1,48) = 3.86, p = 0.055, η p 2 = 0.07 ], where there was worse memory for a target presented second (T2) relative to a target presented first (T1), but only after a delay, not immediately [ t = 2.75, p = 0.046] (see Figure 6A ).

The results can also be interpreted this way: for sentences with grammatical syntax, the effect of Semantic Interpretability was marginally significant, estimated as 2.7% lower accuracy for uninterpretable sentences, p ≈ 0.055 ( Figure 4 top, GI versus GU).

Additional comparison between Experimental Groups 1 and 2 revealed a trend-level difference in employee inventive behavior ( p = 0.086), marginally significant variations in FOCC ( p = 0.055), and significant differential impacts in job insecurity ( p = 0.026).

The IncuCyte® Live-Cell Analysis revealed a marginally significant increase in the migration of SCC-24A by EVs (2 × 5 μg/mg) from F. nucleatum compared to control cells ( P = 0.055; Fig. 7 a).

Alone, ERQ-Reappraisal was a marginally significant predictor of reaction times, F (1, 83.4) = 3.79, p = .055.

Flow did not mediate the relationship between grit and any of the outcomes ( p > 0.05) and is marginally significant for the relationship between flow metacognition and burnout [ b = −0.12, SE = 0.06, p = 0.055, 95% CI (−0.22, −0.02), β = −0.09].

Consistent with previous results regarding the UG and the DG, we found a marginally significant main effect for the Game: F (1, 90) = 3.78, p = 0.055, η 2 p = 0.04, indicating that the proportion of equal split offers was higher for UG participants ( M = 70.0%, SD = 40.9) compared to DG participants ( M = 55.1%, SD = 45.9).

Given that the variable ‘Allele x’ had a marginally significant effect (Wald test X2 = 3.7, P = 0.055), the effect of minor alleles could not be neglected.

The effect of playback speed on participants’ overall perceptions of the speaker was marginally significant ( p = 0.055), with speakers being rated higher at 1x speed ( M = 4.44, SD = 0.58) than at 1.25x ( M = 4.24, SD = 0.79) and 1.5x speeds ( M = 4.20, SD = 0.88).

1 after decomposing and analyzing the five domains of the EQ-5D index after dichotomizing into “no problem” or “any problems,” an increasing tendency of “no problem” was found in the quarantined group in all dimensions except psychological status, although it was not significant in “Self-care” and marginally significant in “Usual activities” (p = 0.0551).

Stratified Analyses For cardiac symptom burden, the between-group difference was marginally significant ( p = .0551) for those with cardiac risk factors but not for those with diagnosed heart disease, and among men ( p = .0472) but not women.

60.3%) was marginally significant ( p = 0.0551) according to the χ 2 test (Fig. 2 ).

A decrease in IOP bias values was detected in study eyes at visit 2 (p<0.0001), subsequently followed by a marginally significant increase (p=0.0553) after reinitiation of PGAs at visit 3 ( figure 1 E).

When we examined the correlation between the residuals (after correcting for pathogen effects) of family‐level infection rate, we found a marginally significant positive correlation between 1 and 8 months of age (correlation coef. = 0.342, t = 1.993, df = 30, p = 0.0554; Figure 4a ), but no significant correlation between 1 and 10 months, (correlation coef. = −0.593, t = 1.4726, df = 4, p = 0.215; Figure 4b ), or between 8 and 10 months (correlation coef. = 0.485, t = 1.5669, df = 8, p = 0.156; Figure 4c ).

2i ), a marginally significant increase in approach speed (EYFP: 3.59 ± 0.28; hM4D: 5.24 ± 0.67; P = 0.0555, unpaired t -test) (Fig. 2j ), an increase in the mean duration of individual investigation (EYFP: 3.04 ± 1.16; hM4D: 7.258 ± 1.446; P = 0.0404, unpaired t -test) (Fig. 2k ), and a less percentage of stretched postures towards stimulus mice (EYFP: 86.22 ± 5.90; hM4D: 49.86 ± 6.71; P = 0.0006, unpaired t -test) (Fig. 2l ).

In addition, there was a marginally significant letter processing speed in first grade on slope effects (p = .0555).

Besides, when AR patients were classified into three groups based on their symptom scores, a moderate-severe phenotype was also associated with Curvularia lunata sensitization, albeit marginally significant ( p = 0.0555; Table 1 ).