“marginally significant”

However, there was a significant difference in the hypertension subgroups (yes or no; p for interactions = 0.013) and a marginally significant difference in the age subgroups (≤ 71 or > 71 years; p = 0.061).

Variation in dissatisfaction rate by household financial status was marginally significant ( P = 0.061) while that by current age ( P = 0.802), gender ( P = 0.570), ethnicity ( P = 0.110), daily per capita income of the household ( P = 0.890), time since surgery ( P = 0.838), and IOL surgery ( P = 0.632) were not significant.

There was a marginally significant association between a higher ARG dose and GH secretion (adjusted R 2 = 17.50%, p = 0.061) ( Table 1 , Figure 3 ). 3.6.

After adjusting for significant covariates (Age, BMI and time of blood draw; all p < 0.01), the GLM revealed a significant main effect of Group [ F (2, 416) = 3.041, p = 0.049, partial η 2 = 0.014] and a marginally significant interaction effect between Group and Sex [ F (2, 416) = 2.812, p = 0.061, partial η 2 = 0.013; Figure 2B ].

Tau pathway For phosphorylated Tau (pTau), the non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis test revealed a marginally significant overall group effect (H = 5.59, p = 0.061).

A marginally significant difference was found in length of hospital stay among those with RVD versus no RVD (7.13 days vs. 5.46 days; P = 0.061).

In the model for FIM total score, diagnosis type was a statistically significant predictor ( P = 0.003; Table 4 ), while the number of AT was marginally significant ( P = 0.061; Table 4 ).

Between 2003 and 2012, the annual Bowen ratio exhibited a marginally significant decreasing trend (p = 0.061), meanwhile the effective precipitation frequency and shallow soil water content during the dry season increased significantly (p<0.001).

The results were similar to those collapsing over all conditions: a marginally significant main effect of motion direction (p = 0.061) but not eccentricity (p = 0.11).

The improvement in sound localization in active (28.0 cm ± 2.3) compared to static listening (31.2 cm ± 2.1) emerged as marginally significant ( F (1,19) = 3.97, p = 0.061, n g 2 = 0.02), but was significant in front space when taking into account listening posture (active = 27.6 ± 3.4 cm, static = 34.5 ± 3.7 cm; F (1,19) = 7.67, p = 0.012, n g 2 = 0.02).

In the Success condition, 6 year-olds’ performance was in the predicted direction but did not reach significance (61.67% chose the no-surprise student, Z = 1.347, p = .248), 7 year-olds’ performance was marginally significant (68.33%, Z = 2.043, p = .061), and 8 year-olds’ performance was significant (75%, Z = 2.88, p = .006).

Thus, in the Pre-Pyrenees, there are statistically significant differences, especially in the case of the bearded vulture (average growth with wild ungulates only: −5±6%, growth in the real scenario: 4±3%, P = 0.028) and the griffon vulture (with wild ungulates only: 0.03±9%, growth in the real scenario: 10±1.6%, P = 0.039), being marginally significant in the case of the Egyptian vulture (with wild ungulates only: −2±8%, growth in the real scenario: 6±0.8%, P = 0.061).

With this model, the variables of shelter, timepoint, shelter-by-timepoint interaction, weight, and log (LOS) were significant (at p < 0.05), with log(age) marginally significant at p = 0.061.

This comparison was marginally significant, t(73) = 1.89, p = .061, d = 0.39.

There was a marginally significant interaction between age and emotion [ F (1, 23) = 3.882, p = 0.061], whereas the main effects of age [ F (1, 23) = 1.119, p = 0.301] and emotion [ F (1, 23) = 0.483, p = 0.494] did not reach significance.

This relationship was marginally significant even when controlling for the sparsity condition (β = 0.080, p = 0.061, partial η 2 = 0.047).

Similarly, limited access to storage was marginally significant ( p = 0.061), but the estimated effect size suggests substantive impact.

Having previous health education regarding DS was associated with higher a MHS (2.27 units higher); however, the relationship is marginally significant (p = 0.061).

For the first-order disparity training group, the first-order disparity threshold improvement was significantly greater than that in the zero-order disparity [ F (1, 9) = 8.650, p < 0.05, η p 2 = 0.490] and marginally significant than that in the second-order training [ F (1, 9) = 4.597, p = 0.061, η p 2 = 0.338].

Furthermore, within the parent smoking subgroup, freshwater fish consumption at the age of 12 showed a marginally significant interaction with childhood aggression (reactive: p = 0.061; total: p = 0.095).

In addition, switch costs were significant with uninformative precues (.03, p < .001), marginally significant with unreliable precues (.01, p = .061), but not with reliable precues (<.01, p = 1; Fig. 2 ).

At T3, there was a marginally significant mean-level difference between the SNI and active control condition on SSB consumption, adjusted for baseline SSB consumption ( b = 0·17, se = 0·10, β = 0·20, P = 0·061, 95 % CI [–0·01, 0·40]).

Age remained marginally significant ( P = .061) in multivariable analyses. 4.

There was a marginally significant main effect of action, F (1,23) = 3.88, p = .061, η 2 p = .14.

Serial dependence of 1-item recall The retrocued item produced a marginally significant attractive bias in the no-overlap condition ( p = 0.061, permutation test; peak-to-peak distance = 1.865°; bootstrapped 95% confidence interval = [1.114°,4.855°], Figure 2A ), and a significant attractive bias in the overlap condition ( p = 0.019, permutation test; peak-to-peak distance = 2.463°; bootstrapped 95% confidence interval = [1.580°, 3.892°], Figure 2B ).