“marginally significant”

In the 450 ms delay condition, there was a marginally significant effect, t 26 = 1.992, p = 0.057.

lowest AIC), BCI was only a marginally significant single predictor of the estuarine residency period of seaward migrating kelts ( P = 0.057, Table 2 ).

The model explained 12.03% of the total adjusted variance, showing a marginally significant trend ( p = 0.057).

In the univariate analysis, GATA6 levels showed a marginally significant association with outcome, exclusively among patients receiving 5-FU/leucovorin (p=0.057) ( table 2 , see online supplementary table S7).

This analysis revealed that there was only a marginally significant main effect of group, F (1, 38) = 3.85, p = .057, η p 2 = .092, 95% CI [.000, .282], p(H 1 /D) = .522, a significant main effect of schedule, F (2, 76) = 18.71, p < .001, η p 2 = .330, [.155, .461], p(H 1 /D) = .987, and a significant interaction between the two factors, F (2, 76) = 7.71, p < .001, η p 2 = .169, [.034, .308], p(H 1 /D) = .502.

In the VBM analysis, MDD patients showed marginally significant gray matter reduction in the left thalamus (peak coordinates: x = − 12, y = − 18, z = 6; t = 4.13; FDR p = 0.057) and right ACC (x = 4, y = 30, z = 24; t = 3.89; FDR p = 0.075).

Ethnic subgroup differences in levels of pandemic stress were marginally significant ( p = 0.057), with Southeast Asians reporting higher levels than East Asians ( p = 0.07).

In addition, the interaction between group and valence was marginally significant, F (1, 57) = 3.769, p = 0.057, η p 2 = 0.062.

Importantly, while for the control group the interaction between stress reactivity and trait anxiety was not significant ( b = 0.007, p = .231), it was marginally significant for the best possible selves group ( b = −0.009, p = .057), indicating a nonsignificant but potentially meaningful descriptive trend that with increasing anxiety levels peripheral resistance reactivity tended to be lower relative to the control group.

The focal interaction remained significant for skepticism of alternative medicine, b = 0.10, SE = 0.04, p = 0.004, and marginally significant for science beliefs, b = 0.07, SE = 0.04, p = 0.057.

However, there was marginally significant differences for IQ (p = 0.057), with subjects from the INST group demonstrating a slightly higher IQ.

After adjusting, Hispanics had 8.29 (95% CI = 1.51, 15.08; p = 0.017) more PTA days compared to whites; furthermore, Blacks had an average of 7.7 more PTA days, but this association was marginally significant (95% CI = −0.22, 15.61; p = 0.057).

Genotype distribution of the ABCB1 C3435T variant was marginally significant between the two groups of patients (P = 0.057), the frequency of the T allele in Clopidogrel non-responders was higher than in the responders (15/19; 78.9%) and (19/36; 52.8%) respectively.

However, after 3 h of bait consumption, a trend emerges, showing a marginally significant decrease in activity (15hs-18hs: estimate= 0.61; p = 0.057).

However, there was a marginally significant increase between the mean variations of IP-10 (p = 0.057) and IL-8 (p = 0.058) in the siliconized one.

In the Bonferroni multiple comparison test, the decreased group had significantly lower depressive symptoms compared to the increased group ( P = 0.012) and had marginally significant lower depressive symptoms compared to the stable medium group ( P = 0.057) in the crude model (Model 1).

Low RANBP9 expression levels were correlated with tumor location (P=0.014), vascular invasion (P=0.057, marginally significant) and normal serum CEA levels (P=0.001).

Indeed, the ABV in the PTFE group showed a marginally significant advantage ( p = 0.057), which, similar to the absolute VBG, could derive from the trend difference in the vertical dimension of the defect at baseline.

The Emotion × Group Interaction was marginally significant, F (1,87) = 3.73, p = .057, η p 2 = .041, d Z = .21. 4 The priming score for ingroup happy faces ( M = 3.15, SD = 5.70) exceeded that for Middle-Eastern happy faces ( M = 1.05, SD = 5.37, see Table 1 ), t (87) = 2.46, p = .016, whereas ingroup ( M = −0.91, SD = 5.06) and outgroup ( M = −0.88, SD = 6.32) fearful faces were comparable in terms of mean priming scores; t (87) = −0.04 , p = . 970.

There was no significant difference in overall survival between high and low risk patients according to N stage (N0-N1) ( P =0.13) and marginally significant discriminatory effect of tumor stage (T1-T2) ( P =0.057) between high risk versus low risk.

Additionally, time per session showed a marginally significant negative association with relative ADL changes ( β = −0.258, p = 0.057). 4 Discussion Approximately 20% of participants who completed home‐based rehabilitation showed a decline in ADL 6 months later, whereas 80% of participants exhibited a maintained or improved ADL.

A total of 562 patients (27.27%) were smokers—the prevalence of smoking was higher among men (30.20%; n = 289) compared to women (24.73%; n = 273); the difference was found to be statistically marginally significant ( p = 0.057).

Regarding the alpha within sessions, the repeated-measures ANOVA revealed that Group had no significant main effect ( F (1,38) = 1.18, p = 0.284), whereas the main effect of the Block was marginally significant ( F (4,35) = 2.54, p = 0.057, η p 2 = 0.225).

For Total Spectrum Frequency (ms 2 ), there was a marginally significant effect of Long run (F (1, 12) = 4.43, p = 0.057, η 2 p = 0.270).

The plasma S100B levels for the three AMS sufferers changed from 0.100 μg/l (95 % CI −0.029 to 0.229) at baseline to 0.127 μg/l (95 % CI −0.031 to 0.284) at high altitude which was marginally significant ( p = 0.057) compared to the non-AMS sufferers who showed a non-significant ( p = 0.35) change from 0.187 μg/l (95 % CI 0.102–0.272) at baseline to 0.143 μg/l (95 % CI 0.108–0.179) at altitude.