“marginally significant”

Plasma Lp-PLA 2 activity did not correlate with CSF biomarkers nor with white matter changes within diagnoses, apart from a marginally significant inverse association with CSF Aβ42 in aMCI (r = -0.29, P = 0.03) (Table 3 ).

In the 6 case studies involving more than one display trait, there was never a significant relationship between trait means and our estimates for Δt ( P ≥ 0.31) or for Δp ( P ≥ 0.33); in four of the case studies the relationship between trait mean and preference strength was also non-significant ( P ≥ 0.35), but in 2 case studies it was significant or marginally significant ( Gryllus spp.; P = 0.03; Enchenopa ; P = 0.07, although the latter relationship was negative).

Furthermore, marginally significant association was also observed for lung cancer and head neck cancer with OR of 2.38 (95%CI: 1.06-5.36, P=0.03) and of 2.40 (95%CI: 1.46-3.93, P=0.001), respectively.

The approximately 40-kDa procathepsin B exhibited a marginally significant increase of 93±27% (mean±SEM; P<0.03) in the PADK-treated group as compared to vehicle-injected transgenic mice samples ( Fig. 4A and B ).

In addition, the univariate comparisons indicated a marginally significant main effect of personalised risk message on positive outcome expectancies, F (1, 324) = 5.00, p = .03, η p 2 = .02 (α = .025).

In fact, the SiCE was apparent only for pairs containing 1 [ F (1, 115) = 34.06, MSE = 166,254, η 2 p = 0.23], with no evidence of linear modulation (Figure 1C ), and was minimal and marginally significant for pairs without 1 [ F (1, 117) = 3.85, MSE = 32,329, η 2 p = 0.03] (Figure 1D ).

We only detected a marginally significant correlation between the NAc ALFF and HAMD scores in the REST-meta-MDD cohort ( p = .03).

The difference was marginally significant for the angry face ( t (118) = 2.20, p = 0.030, Cohen’s d = 0.40, 95% CI [0.003, 0.07], uncorrected) and nonsignificant for the fearful face ( t (118) = 1.73, p = 0.087, Cohen’s d = 0.32, 95% CI [–0.004, 0.06], uncorrected).

A multivariate analysis with AHI as a dependent variable and significant or marginally significant univariate predictors as covariates ( Table 4 ) revealed that only the SDI and BMI were associated with an elevated AHI ( p = 0.03 and p = 0.01, respectively).

[ 23 ], their cohort included adults and children with IgAN and a correlation between percent Gd-IgA1/IgA and contemporaneous UPCR was found to be marginally significant ( r = 0.25, P = 0.03).

R 2 = 0.60) that included three covariates (depth, richness, and BLCC) with a similar fit indicated that the richness effect was marginally significant ( p = 0.03).

Only one Q statistic was marginally significant ( p = 0 . 03 )—the variance of the residuals in model m2 was significantly low in the age range 15.1–16.3, indicating that its fitted σ was too high at that age.

In contrast, StromalScore demonstrated weaker yet marginally significant correlations across datasets ( p value ≈ 0.03–0.09), indicating that high-TIL-80 score tumors exhibit both increased immune infiltration and modest stromal enrichment.

Note, however, that even for these relatively uninformative studies the evidence favors \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$\mathcal {H}_{0}$\end{document} H 0 , whereas the respective classical p values equal p = .06 (i.e., “marginally significant”), p = .03 (i.e., “significant, reject \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$\mathcal {H}_{0}$\end{document} H 0 ”), and p = .06 (i.e., “marginally significant”). 3 Finally, consider the evidence for the studies in which the effect is in the opposite direction and most of the posterior mass is concentrated on negative values of ρ .

When comparing across metabolites, we found a significant difference in correlation coefficients between GABA+ and Glx in LO ( p = 0.001) and a marginally significant difference in EVC ( p = 0.03).

Planned comparisons further showed that monosyllables with large rises in sonority (e.g., blif ) produced reliably more accurate responses relative to small rises (e.g., bnif , t1(39) = 8.68, p<.0001; t2(45) = 3.25, p<.003), which, in turn produced reliably more accurate responses compared to sonority plateaus (e.g., bdif , t1(39) = 7.14, p<.0001; t2(45) = 5.27, p<.0001); the contrast between sonority plateaus and falls (e.g., lbif ) was marginally significant (t1(39) = 2.37, p<.03; t2(45) = 1.13, p<.28) To demonstrate that the effect of syllable type is not due to artifact associated with binary data [31] , we also submitted the results to a General Mixed Effects Model logistic regression model with syllable (monosyllables vs. disyllables) and type (e.g., blif, bnif, bdif, lbif ) as fixed effects, and participants and items as random effects.

There was a marginally significant interaction of cue presence and directional cue type, F (1,81) = 4.67, p = .03, η p 2 = .06, indicating, if anything, that there was a larger difference in performance between the control and arrow conditions than the control and human figure conditions.

Selection of treatment strategy on the basis of 18 F-FDG PET/CT alone was significantly associated with the survival outcomes at nine months (P=0.03) and marginally significant at 12 months (P=0.03).

High and significant heterogeneity ( I 2 = 93.56, p < 0.001) existed and the publication bias was marginally significant ( p = 0.03).

Multiple perpetrators for a sexual assault incident The first-order autocorrelation was marginally significant (p = 0.03) and insignificant for two or more lags.

A marginally significant interaction effect between gender and screening result was observed for changes in anxiety, ( P =0.03) and a statistically significant effect was observed for depression, ( P <0.01).

When we analyzed the data by site, the effect of day of week is marginally significant ( P = 0.03 for site 1; P = 0.02 for site 2; P = 0.003 for site 3).

With Bonferroni adjustment for 15 comparisons ( Figure 1 ), leg-minus-forearm differences were marginally significant ( P =0.03–0.06).

A marginally significant recall direction by domain interaction was identified ( F (1,36) = 4.99; p = .03; η 2 = .12), with spatial backward spans significantly longer than verbal backward spans while no significant differences between spatial and verbal forward spans was identified.

(2012) found marginally significant ( P = 0.03) acceleration of evolution of X relative to autosomal genes as measured by dN/dS in two of three comparisons of pea aphid genes to other aphid species for several hundred genes.