“marginally significant”

The level of Slug mRNA was found to be inversely correlated with NOR1 mRNA levels, although this difference was marginally significant ( R = −0.298, P = 0.059) (Figure 1B ).

Among the other variables, only age was marginally significant ( P =0.059) ( Table 3 ).

The results showed a significant main effect of noise level ( F (1, 8) = 50.793, p < 0.001) and spatial frequency ( F (9, 72) = 94.486, p < 0.001) but only a marginally significant main effect of deprivation stage ( F (1, 8) = 4.858, p = 0.059).

6.2 in men, marginally significant at p = 0.059; and 2.1 vs. 1.9 in women, p = <.0001) and past year partners (1.9 vs. 1.6 in men, p = <.0001; and 0.78 vs. 0.83 in women, p = 0.012).

Poisson regression analysis showed that the decline in nondiabetes-related LEAs was marginally significant after adjustment for age, sex, level of amputation, and year (0.97 decrease by year [95% CI 0.93–1.00], P = 0.059).

A higher chronicity index in patients with relapsed LN was marginally significant (p=0.059), as shown in Supplementary Table 2 .

The difference between the DLD and HFA-LI groups was marginally significant in Structure B (adjusted p = 0.059), but not significant in Structure C (adjusted p = 1.000).

The main effect of Dose was marginally significant [ F (2, 14) = 3.54, p = 0.059].

Further, in Organic Evolution, those with preinstruction content knowledge score at or below the class median had a significantly higher increase in their BAS Part A score ( p = 0.0360) and a marginally significant higher increase in their BAS Part B ( p = 0.059), on average, than those scoring above the median.

Association between the sector and MS was marginally significant in the model unadjusted for the gender ( P = 0.059).

There was a marginally significant relation of hippocampal volume with both nigral (−0.52 cm 3 , P = 0.059) and limbic (−0.38 cm 3 , P = 0.051) Lewy bodies.

These analyses revealed a marginally significant WA × CO interaction ( Figure 4 ; ANOVA, F 1,16 = 4.14, P = 0.059).

The reduction in deviance (from the model including ‘relaxation,’ ‘distraction,’ and ‘reducing boredom’ as predictors to the model additionally including ‘activation’ as predictor) was marginally significant (χ 2 = 12.11; df = 6; p = 0.059), with ‘activation’ explaining 1.86% of the variance in perceived pain intensity.

Our analysis revealed a marginally significant lower number of duplication events in AD+P cases compared with AD−P controls ( P =0.059) using multivariable regression model.

The corresponding descriptive statistics are given in Table 3 . Since the analysis for the variable “magnitude” turned out to be at least marginally significant in the overall sample, F (1, 49) = 3.731, p = .059, we checked whether this variable is relevant for the subset of trials in the SR condition which is designated for the logistic regression analysis.

This Valence by Arousal interaction was strongest and statistically significant for the OCT task ( β = − 0.24 p = 0.011), marginally significant for the RAT task ( β = − 0.18 p = 0.059), and nonsignificant with the flexibility scores from the AUT task ( β = − 0.06 p = 0.57).

The results indicated significant main effects of the group [ F (2, 25) = 14.058, p < 0.05, η 2 = 0.529, large effect size] and the discrimination location [ F (1, 25) = 47.783, p < 0.05, η 2 = 0.551, large effect size], while the duration effect was marginally significant [ F (1, 25) = 3.904, p = 0.059].

However, further correlation analysis revealed only a marginally significant correlation between 2D∶4D ratio measurements and impulsivity scores ( r (88) = −.202, p = .059) across all participants, and within the groups, a significant correlation among offenders ( r (42) = −.396, p = .009) but not nonoffenders ( r (46) = .119, p = .432).

At the occipital sites, the learning effect was significant on the left hemisphere for the OL group (P = 0.028), and marginally significant on the right hemisphere for both groups (ML: P = 0.059; OL: P = 0.053) (see Figure 9 ).

Cdkn2a , which is located on chromosome 4, was affected by interstitial deletions in 15% and 24% and by copy-neutral LOHs in 19% and 0% of TLs in the 95 and 65 kcal groups, respectively; no terminal deletions were detected, and the total LOH frequency was 33% and 24%, respectively ( Table 1 ), indicating a marginally significant CR-related decrease in the frequency of copy-neutral LOHs ( p = 0.059).

We found a significant difference between the conditions at 83%, t (22) = 2.319, p < 0.05, and a marginally significant difference at 17%, t (22) = −2.01, p = 0.059 (Figure 2 ), although none of the tests survived Bonferroni correction.

There was no difference in transformation frequency between isolates with pherotype 1 or non-pherotype 1 alleles (Mann-Whitney U test, p = 0.384); this difference becomes marginally significant if strains lacking any detectable transformation are excluded from this analysis (Mann-Whitney U test, p = 0.059).

The interaction of change type and cue type was marginally significant [ F (1, 12) = 4.33, p = .059].

After adjusting for confounding factors, time × group interaction became significant for total n -6 PUFA (p = 0.026) and marginally significant for C15:0 (p = 0.059) and C16:0 (p = 0.056), and became non-significant for C17:1 (p = 0.162) and C18:3n-3 (p = 0.105).

For EI, a marginally significant difference between sexes was found on emotion management, F (1, 177) = 3.63, p = 0.059, η 2 = 0.020.