“marginally significant”

The Tukey least-squares-means test showed that participants accepted offers made when the computer displayed GL more than when it displayed RH ( p = 0.0623, marginally significant) or no light animation ( p < 0.05), but no significant difference was found between when the computer displayed RH and no light animation.

The only difference in micronutrient adequacy by sex was for iron (92.8% of women below the RNI compared with 27.8% of men, P < 0.001), although the difference in zinc adequacy was marginally significant (0.0% of women below the RNI compared with 22.2% of men, P = 0.0623).

The tenth tree was marginally significant ( P = 0.0625).

In the MSB group, the sleep score in ESAS decreased an average 2.4 points from baseline to day 7, which indicated a marginally significant improvement in sleep ( P = .0625), with an effect size of 0.97.

The covariate emotional attachment to the in-group was marginally significant ( b = 0.1971, SE = 0.1047, t = 1.8825, p = 0.0627, 95% CIs = -0.0107, 0.4050).

A marginally significant main effect of the condition ( F (2,37.1)=2.983, p=0.0628) on the response change in the stimulation session relative to the baseline session (i.e., stimulation effect) was observed, indicating that these changes may depend on the stimulation condition.

The one-way ANOVA showed marginally significant differences among the expression groups (F = 5.1907, p = 0.0629).

Begg’s test was marginally significant (Kendall’s tau = -0.4242, p = 0.0629).

The interaction among time, stress state and regulation strategy was marginally significant [ F (2,174) = 2.802, p = 0.063, η 2 = 0.031].

Higher perceived COVID-19 risk predicted greater depressive symptoms ( p < 0.001), particularly among adults with histories of childhood trauma, though this effect was marginally significant ( p = 0.063).

The effects of cellulose and water contents of 5–10 cm soil layer (W2) were marginally significant (p = 0.063 and = 0.059, respectively) with positive coefficients.

Stratified analyses Subgroup analyses revealed a marginally significant interaction for sex ( P = 0.063), with male patients demonstrating a stronger negative association (β = − 0.24, 95% CI: − 0.50–0.02) than females did (β = −0 .06, 95% CI: − 0.16–0.05), suggesting a potential trend toward heightened sensitivity of male patients to temporal variations in surgical scheduling.

The interaction between region and number approached significance, F (1, 27) = 2.62, p = 0.082, η 2 p = 0.089 and further analyses yielded a marginally significant difference between plural and singular attractors in the centroparietal region, t (27) = 1.94, p = 0.063, and a significant difference in the parieto-occipital region, t (27) = 2.32, p = 0.028, with plural attractors showing an increased amplitude when compared to singular attractors.

On multivariate analysis, a total dose ≥63 Gy, a single site of metastatic disease, and undergoing ≥4 cycles of chemotherapy were independent prognostic factors for better OS ( P = 0.007, P = 0.014, and P = 0.038, respectively); radiotherapy involving metastatic sites was a marginally significant prognostic factor ( P = 0.063).

The mRNA expression of anti-apoptotic BCL-2 showed a marginally significant downregulation at the concentration of 100 μg/mL MTX compared to 400 μg/mL concentration (0.38 ± 0.11, p-value = 0.063); moreover, the BCL-2/BAX ratio -at x concentration of MTX-was significantly lower than 1:1 (0.33 ± 0.12, P-value = 0.019), implying the pro-apoptotic effect of this dose on RPE cells ( Figure 3B ).

Weight loss was significantly associated with poor DMFS ( P = 0.006) as well as OS ( P < 0.001), and had a marginally significant influence on PFS ( P = 0.063).

In overall survival analysis, advanced age significantly predicted worse survival outcomes ( p = 0.043), whereas positive KRT1 expression showed a marginally significant predictive effect ( p = 0.063).

We noticed though, a marginally significant correlation (statistical trend) with liver steatosis ( p =0.063) and IMAT ( p =0.059).

correlated with overall survival (hazard ratio: 0.66, 95% confidence interval: 0.50-0.85; P = .0017). Multivariate analysis indicated that BARD1 expression was significantly associated with distant metastasis-free survival (hazard ratio: 4.60, 95% confidence interval: 1.22-17.28; P = .0239) whereas marginally significant for disease-free survival (hazard ratio: 1.00, 95% confidence interval: 1.00-1.01, P = .0630) and disease-specific survival (hazard ratio: 1.96, 95% confidence interval: 0.97-3.96; P = .0602).

There were 40 males whose worst eye had wet AMD, versus 15 females, which was marginally significant ( P = 0.063, t test, correcting for the relative abundance of males in the study population).

Compared to the Col-0 wildtype, the frd3-3 mutant showed a significant reduction of root growth in response to high Zn according to the 2-way ANOVA ( p < 0.001) while the genotype x treatment interaction was marginally significant for frd3-7 ( p = 0.063) (Fig. 1d, e , Supplementary Fig. 4 and Supplementary Table 2 and 3 ).

Longitudinally, the model also showed an interactive effect of LO and RO ( b = 0.06, SE = 0.02, p = .006), and a marginally significant main effect of partner LO ( b = -0.05, SE = 0.03, p = .063).

Results showed that decomposability of DOC was significantly related to R h across the forests in the warm season ( P = 0.003), and marginally significant in the cool season ( P = 0.063, Fig. 5 ).

The Emotion × Self-Relevance × Task × Region interaction was marginally significant in the mid-regions omnibus [ F (8,384) = 2.32, p = 0.063, η 2 = 0.046] and not significant in the peripheral regions omnibus [ F (2,96) = 0.72, p = 0.489, η 2 = 0.015].

The LTM to test in Context A showed a marginally significant difference, t (14) = −2.02, p = 0.063, d = −0.76, suggesting a trend toward increased approach when the sipper was present in the conditioning context (Figure 8A right panel). 3.4.3.4.