Barely Significant
← all phrases

“marginally significant”

26,083 sentences · 26,083 papers · 36,483 search hits before verification · confirmed specimen

Sighted at

p>=0.1

Listed by Hankins (2013) · Otte et al. (2022)

In the literature

marginally significantP = 0.0240.5× alphagold
4 , right panel); (b) for HLA-I, there was a marginally significant effect of Gene (P = 0.024, F-test), with higher PBA values for gene C (Fig. 5 A), whereas the Virus × Gene effect was not statistically significant (P = 0.166, Greenhouse–Geisser test) (Fig. 5 B); (c) For HLA-II, there was a significant effect of Gene (P = 0.011, F-test), with higher PBA values for gene DQB1 (Fig. 6 A), and the Virus × Gene effect was highly significant (P < 0.001, Greenhouse–Geisser test) (Fig. 6 B).
marginally significantp = 0.0240.5× alphagold
Stratified analysis showed a significant association between adherence to the Mediterranean diet and risk of gastric cancer in case–control studies (RR = 0.44;95%CI:0.32–0.61, p < 0.001), and a marginally significant association in prospective cohort studies (RR = 0.88; 95%CI: 0.79–0.98, p = 0.024), respectively.
marginally significantp=0.0240.5× alphagold
This however increased in Kano state from 50.88% (SD=16.68) in 2018 to 54.20% (SD=20.34%) by 2021 with a marginally significant mean difference for both the one-tailed (p=0.024) and the two-tailed (p=0.048) t-test with a small effect size (Cohen’s d=−0.31; 95% CI=−0.608 to –0.003).
marginally significantp = 0.0240.5× alphagold
It has already been argued that it is inappropriate to compare the annualized δ 13 C record with an annualized rainfall record because of imprecision in the age model, and it is not surprising that the correlation with data from nearest rainfall station at Pafuri (22.450°S, 31.311°E), which has a near-complete record since AD 1924, is marginally significant (r = -0.246, p = 0.024, n = 84)( S2 Fig ).
marginally significantp = 0.0240.5× alphagold
Outcomes that maintained significant (or marginally significant) changes between baseline and post-intervention after controlling for adherence effects on change included: noticing ( d = 0.90; p = 0.024), attention regulation ( d = 1.38; p = 0.001), self-regulation ( d = 1.48; p < 0.001), body listening ( d = 0.77; p = 0.064), resilience ( d = 0.82; p = 0.088), perceived stress ( d = 1.42; p = 0.002), mindful self-care ( d = 1.01; p = 0.002), body appreciation ( d = 0.96; p = 0.005), intuitive eating ( d = 0.72; p = 0.050), LOCES ( d = 1.15; p = 0.002), and EDE-Q7 scores ( d = 0.61; p = 0.088).
marginally significantp = 0.0250.5× alphagold
If we ignore the marginally significant interaction and combine the two groups, focusing on the main effect of time, differences in state anxiety are found between all three time points ( p = 0.025 comparing pre-test and mid-test means; p < 0.001 comparing pre-test and post-test means; and, and p < 0.001 comparing mid-test and post-test means).
marginally significantP = 0.0250.5× alphagold
To examine whether sequencing error in phased assemblies affects SV locations, we compared breakpoints in 21 CLR genomes with 11 HiFi genomes and find a marginally significant enrichment for differences in insertions (4.40% vs. 4.29%, P = 0.025, Student's t -test) but no enrichment for deletions (1.75% vs. 1.77%, P = 0.52, Student's t -test), which we confirmed with permutation tests ( P = 0.012 insertions, P = 0.74 deletions, 100,000 permutations).
marginally significantP = 0.0250.5× alphagold
Behavior- Foraging Motivation Test There was a marginally significant effect of apparatus on proportion of test spent on the start platform ( P = 0.025) and latency to the wood shavings platform ( P = 0.029), but as apparatus was balanced with all other fixed effects, this has no bearing on results apart from its inclusion as a main effect likely increases power of the tests of fixed effects of interest.