“marginally significant”

Mechanisms of motor control in handwriting readiness In the integrated structural model, while Pencil Grip showed a marginally significant positive association with Writing Performance (β = 0.137, p = 0.066), its direct impact appeared to be partially suppressed by the inclusion of the overarching VMI-Performance factor.

For the external early-stage (< T2) patients, although the survival difference was marginally significant ( p = 0.066), likely due to the limited sample size and low event rate, a consistent trend of risk separation was observed.

For this group, the conflict RT was marginally significant (t(13) = -2.004; p = .066) while the conflict accuracy was significant (t(13) = -2.4; p < .05).

There was a marginally significant difference for post-test [ F (2, 62) = 2.84, p = 0.066].

For future metabolic risk score, BCAAs showed a marginally significant effect on metabolic syndrome risk (OR = 3.222, p = 0.066), while different results were from Hellmuth et al.'s study, which suggested tyrosine, rather than BCAAs, was the useful biomarker for future risk of IR and metabolic risk in 80 obese children with one-year follow-up.

Tumor CTLA-4 expression was a marginally significant prognostic factor for FFS ( p = 0.066).

The correlation between BPT and NAA remained significant (r = 0.485 p = 0.048) and the SIB correlation with NAA was marginally significant (r = 0.456 p = 0.066).

The interaction between cue condition and target congruency was marginally significant, F (6, 54) = 2.12, p = 0.066.

Backward masking reduced target visibility [ F (1,14) = 92.73], and close proximity was marginally significant in reducing target visibility [ F (1,14) = 3.96, p = 0.066].

2 a–d, Table S1 ) and a marginally significant relation in another three populations (OK-BAC, TX-GRO, and TX-LIV, GLM Density: P = 0.066–0.074; see Table S1 ).

The linear trend effect was marginally significant ( F 1,9 = 4.37, P = 0.066) explaining 49% of apparent dispersal variation in wet years, whose model averaged estimates (Table S1 in File S4 ) linearly decreased from 0.16 (SE = 0.03) to 0.09 (SE = 0.03) ( Figure 2 ).

A simple effects test revealed that when the space dimension was discontinuous, the effect of visual imagery vividness on verb-clustering performance was marginally significant ( p = 0.066).

The effect of L1 proficiency was marginally significant (F = 3.70,df = 25.18, p = 0.066).

The intervention also significantly increased parents’ self-efficacy for condom use, b(SE)=0.60(0.21), p=0.007, and showed marginally significant effects on parent and child HIV knowledge [b(SE)=0.60(0.32), p=.066, b(SE)=0.85(0.43), p=0.052, respectively].

Second, when analyzed separately for each group, the correlation was marginally significant for GII ( ρ = 0.346; N = 29; p = 0.066) and not significant for GI ( ρ = −0.042; N = 14; p = 0.892).

aeruginosa there was a marginally significant interaction between donor microbiome and genotype ( F = 1.9; df = 7, 219; p = 0.066).

None of the variables predict self-harming behavior, except for the two related to interaction with content in digital social networks self-injury ( p = 0.043) and suicide ( p = 0.001) content in digital social networks; suicide ideation is marginally significant ( p = 0.066).

There was also a marginally significant interaction between Condition, Block, and Group, F (3,114) = 2.47, p < 0.066, η p 2 = 0.06.

The Part factor was not significant for d-prime, F (3, 33) = 1.39, p = 0.26, and marginally significant for RT, F (3, 33) = 2.63, p = 0.066, indicating a trend toward acceleration of the responses.

For Hdac6, the “age”‐dependent increase in protein levels was marginally significant ( p = 0.066, R 2 = 0.16; Figure 4B ).

In addition, we observed a marginally significant main effect of emotion at anterior electrodes over both hemispheres for the Nc (400 to 600 ms), F (1, 31) = 3.65, p = 0.066 and a significant main effect of emotion at anterior electrodes over both hemispheres for the Pc (600 and 800 ms), F (1, 31) = 9.45, p = 0.004.

On the other hand, a positive correlation was found between NfL and age at treatment ( r = 0.59, P = .046) along with a marginally significant correlation between NfL and duration of the disease ( r = 0.55, P = .066) (Figure 2 E and 2 ).

Participants showed a marginally significant increase in overall discrimination accuracy (day 1: 83.8 ± 8.0%, mean ± standard deviation; day 2: 86.8 ± 5.8%; paired t test, t (19) = 1.95, P = 0.066; Cohen’s d av = 0.43) [ 41 ] and a significant decrease in overall discrimination RTs (day 1: 696 ± 70 ms; day 2: 665 ± 72 ms; paired t test, t (19) = 3.17, P = 0.005; Cohen’s d av = 0.43).

May found a marginally significant effect, F (1, 272) = 3.42, p = .066, d = .22, such that participants in May who were relatively less worried about the disease produced harsher moral judgments than participants less worried about the disease in March, perhaps as a function of extended exposure to this threat.

More direct to our hypothesis, the interaction between week and country was marginally significant [ F (4,526) = 2.22, p = 0.066, η2 = 0.02)].