“marginally significant”

Furthermore, RG2 showed a marginally significant association with a high risk of intra-partum complications, high birth weight and cesarean section ( p = 0.067, 0.106 and 0.095, respectively).

Nevertheless, there was a marginally significant magnitude X category interaction (F(2,29) = 2.82, p = 0.067).

There was a marginally significant difference between urban boys and girls in terms of weight status (p = 0.067).

Intraoperatively, patients perceived a marginally significant 0.4 points more pain in the eye treated with tetracaine than in the eye treated with proparacaine (95% CI 0.0–0.8, P =0.067), after controlling for pain experienced during drop instillation.

Correlation analysis revealed that the two chosen radiomics features had a significant association with clinical T stage ( P = 0.031) and a marginally significant relationship with clinical N stage ( P = 0.067), respectively (eFigure 5 ).

Additionally, the predictive effect of reasoning ability in the general cognitive ability factors on fraction exact calculation performance was marginally significant ( β = 0.136, p = .067).

This comparison yielded a marginally significant effect in favor of the additive model χ 2 (2) = 5.42, p = 0.067, p pb = 0.069, indicating that the two additional parameters did indeed add explanatory value.

Event-Related Potential Results N1 As shown in Figures 2B,D , the 2(game-result) × 2(category) ANOVA for N1 peak amplitude showed a marginally significant interaction between two variables [ F (1,32) = 3.60, p = 0.067, η p 2 = 0.101].

We found a negative and marginally significant correlation between percent of changes in serum adiponectin level and percent of changes in visceral adipose tissue (VAT) ( r = −0.429, p =0.067) and BMI ( r = −0.440, p =0.059) as well as an inverse relationship between percent of changes in leptin/adiponectin with VAT ( r = −0.724, p < 0.001) in the intervention group.

As shown in Figure 5D , there was no effect of illusory target size on constant error, F (1, 13) = 0.299, p = 0.594, η p 2 = 0.022, a marginally significant effect of physical size, F (3, 39) = 2.58, p = 0.067, η p 2 = 0.166, and no interaction, F (3, 39) = 1.23, p = 0.311, η p 2 = 0.087.

Once bite forces were z -score standardised, method was no longer significantly retained; however, a significant model linking bite to size could not be produced, although the model was marginally significant ( P =0.067).

However, we further explored disease-free survival (DFS) in early-stage (n=162), and the result suggested that higher expression of PRAME was marginally significant (P=0.067) related to higher recurrence ( Figure S2C ).

This difference is marginally significant ( Figure 5 A, p = 0.067 by Fisher’s exact test); although, the expected Nonsyn/Syn could be slightly reduced when only the edited genes were considered.

A marginally significant interaction effect was found between gender and picture type for emotional experience (F (1,25) = 3.80, p = 0.067; ηP 2 = 0.13).

However, men did expect a bigger goal difference than women (men: 1.64±0.16; women: 1.24±0.10, t 48 = 2.07, p = 0.043), and although marginally significant, men found the match more frustrating (men: 3.16±0.34; women; 2.16±0.41, t 48 = −1.88, p = 0.067) and were bigger soccer fans than women (men: 0.22±0.16; women: −0.21±0.14, t 48 = 2.00, p = 0.051).

Additionally, a Session × Rhythm Set interaction was marginally significant, F (1, 10) = 4.21, p = .067.

Genetic effects of NOS1 ex1f‐VNTR genotypes on inhibition and its related brain structural/functional patterns Marginally significant interaction of NOS1 ex1f‐VNTR genotypes (based on the allele counts of 25R) and ADHD diagnosis was found for inhibition function ( F = 2.82, p = 0.067).

The interaction effect of the average CJ height of the first 15 s was marginally significant ( F = 3.550, p = 0.067).

= 0.10, t 67 = 2.83, p = 0.006, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.09, 0.49]) and marginally significant for fatigue ( b = 0.29, s.e. = 0.15, t 78 = 1.86, p = 0.067, 95% CI [−0.02, 0.59]) but not tense arousal ( b = 0.18, s.e. = 0.13, t 62 = 1.37, p = 0.177, 95% CI [−0.08, 0.43]).

In the multivariate analyses for DFS and OS, the presence of more than 10% intraductal carcinoma components showed a marginally significant increase in the hazard rate (HR) of tumor recurrence ( P =0.067) and significantly increased the HR of mortality ( P =0.040).

N400a Analysis without including midline electrodes showed that Group by Semantic judgment by Hemisphere interaction was marginally significant (F(2, 38) = 2.9, p = .067).

A marginally significant interaction between condition and group was found for class D ( F = 3.481, P = 0.067).

Detection Error Rate The analysis of the detection error rate indicated main effects of expertise ( F (1, 51)=35.19, p <.001, η 2 =.41), presentation ( F( 1, 51)=59.89, p <.001, η 2 =.54) and modification (marginally significant; F (1, 51)=3.51, p =.067, η 2 =.06), with a lower error rate for experts (21%) compared to non-experts (46%), in simultaneous presentation (21%) compared to sequential presentation (47%) and in violation (31%) compared to no violation (36%).

A marginally significant correlation was found between the semantic representations in the left middle fusiform and left anterior fusiform regions ( r = 0.26, p = 0.067).

Regarding changes in relatedness ( ΔQGM ), we observed a negative association with ALL G , which was statistically significant in Site 2 ( F 1,47.9 = 8.97, p = 0.004), and marginally significant in Site 1 ( F 1,49.8 = 3.51, p = 0.067; Table S4 ).