“marginally significant”

Men caring for a family member and women caring for non-kin were disproportionately likely to be social isolates, but the difference was obviated for men caring for non-kin, as indicated by a marginally significant interaction effect ( p < .06) between the indicators for caregiver gender and non-kin care-relationship.

At the between-individual level, vTST showed a marginally significant negative association with dTST (β = −247.86, p = 0.060; Table 4 ), suggesting that individuals with lower total sleep time variability tended to show greater sleep perception bias.

At T1, the gender difference was marginally significant, with t (162.28) = 1.87, p = 0.06, d = 0.29 (also see the intercept of the LGCM).

However, NLR in the DGA group was marginally significant compared to DG ( p = 0.06) but not different compared to the C ( p = 1.00) or A ( p = 1.00) groups.

Conversely, urinary creatinine (CREA-U) levels increased significantly in the intervention group ( p = 0.018) but not in the control group, with a marginally significant intergroup difference ( p = 0.060).

The number of osteomyelitis-related hospitalizations showed a marginally significant positive association ( β = 0.237, OR = 1.268, 95%CI: 0.990 ~ 1.623, p = 0.060), suggesting that increased hospitalizations might contribute to attitude formation, though it did not reach statistical significance.

A marginally significant trend of increasing concentration was observed with decreasing age among applicator children (p = 0.060), and younger children within these families had significantly higher concentrations when compared to their older siblings (p = 0.040).

No significant effects were evident for any of the self-report measures of impulsivity, although a marginally significant interaction effect of DRD2TaqI A and DRD4 VNTR was evident on the SSS Total scale ( F (1,177) = 3.52, p = .06, η p 2 = .02).

In the final multivariate model, only gender was found to be significant (p = 0.02), while physical illness was marginally significant (p = 0.06) Discussion To our knowledge this is the first study from Pakistan that measures the prevalence estimate of anxiety using a validated instrument.

Results Internal consistency was modest, but similar to the original value (alpha = 0.62), and test-retest correlation at four months follow-up was moderately encouraging for a short instrument such as this (n = 31, test retest intraclass correlation = 0.58), and change at the mean level was minimal, but marginally significant (from an average of 3.3 to 3.8, p = 0.06).

Statistical comparisons of the overall frequency distribution among the youngest age group with the two older age groups and the euploid sample were statistically significant (p = 0.02, p = 0.02 and p = 0.0005, respectively) and marginally significant between the middle and older age groups (p = 0.06).

The analysis revealed a significant agency×context×ROI interaction for the first onset, (F(2,19) = 5.14, p<.05), and a marginally significant agency×context×ROI interaction for the second onset (F(2,19) = 3.85, p = .06).

There was a very strong, marginally significant negative linear relationship for the LINE-1 assay for β-BHC (β = −0.98; p = 0.06).

After adjustment for the number of live births, the difference between the two ethnic groups (Slavs vs Tartars and Bashkirs) was marginally significant ( P =0.06) suggesting that this is largely because of different reproductive patterns ( Remennick, 1989 ).

The discrepancy between the direct and indirect estimate was marginally significant (I 2 =71%, P=0.06).

We observed a significant increase in the estimates of evolving HOMA-IR with increasing levels of oxLDL ( P < 0.001) and a marginally significant association with F 2 Isop ( P = 0.06).

AR 2 and AR 3 populations show a marginally significant deviation from expectation of neutrality ( p < 0.06 for AR 2 ; p < 0.07 for AR 3 ).

We also find a marginally significant correlation between the value of epistasis, ε , and the cost of the mutations (Pearson's correlation r = 0.19, P = 0.06).

In women, child birth and caesarean section were associated with increased risk of HCV infection, although the association was marginally significant for delivery (p = 0.06).

In contrast, fading conditions produced significant negative partial-repetition costs in reaction times with rotating boxes for location × shape, t (15) = −2.41, p < 0.02, and marginally significant costs for location × response, t (15) = − 1.61, p = 0.06; no effects were reliable in the error data, p values > 0.3.

The VL muscular activity showed a marginally significant difference in group × condition interaction effect [F(1,32) = 3.74, p = 0.06].

Furthermore, we identified a marginally significant main effect for condition [ F (2, 47)=2.98, p =0.060] and a highly significant condition×group interaction [ F (2, 47)=8.54, p <0.001].

There is a significant difference when comparing the mean RMCBS slopes of symptomatic infected C57BL/6 and infected balb/c (p = 0.01); a significant difference when comparing symptomatic infected C57BL/6 and non-infected C57BL/6 controls (p = 0.004); a marginally significant difference (p = 0.06) when comparing symptomatic infected C57BL/6 with asymptomatic infected C57BL/6; a non-significant difference when comparing infected balb/c and non-infected control balb/c (p = 0.48); and a non-significant difference (p = 0.70) when comparing infected balb/c with asymptomatic infected C57BL/6 and non-infected control C57BL/6.

Furthermore, it was marginally significant following exclusion of participants with MDD ( p = .06, η p 2 = .08) or ADHD ( p = .06, η p 2 = .08).

Analysis of Cohort 2 revealed a similar, though marginally significant effect of MSEW, with MSEW mice again moving faster than controls (p = 0.06).