“marginally significant”

It was determined that angle rotated was a marginally significant predictor of gestation length (r 2 = 0.009, β 1 = 0.000396, p = 0.038).

As shown in Supplementary Table 2 , the proportion of two-haplotype blocks was linked to decreasing EFS ( P = 0.012) and OS ( P = 2.6 × 10 − 4 ), and it remained marginally significant after adjusting for NDJ error type ( P = 0.038 for OS).

[ 14 ] showed a standard difference in means of 0.40 and a standard error of 0.19, yielding a marginally significant z-value of 2.08 (p = 0.038).

However, the RCR of the Cry1Ah treatment was reduced by 7%, and a marginally significant difference ( P = 0.038) was observed compared with the control.

While there was no treatment × category interaction [ F (4, 47) = 0.169, p = 0.954, η 2 = 0.004], indicating that OXT effects were similar across the five categories, there was a marginally significant treatment × country interaction [ F (3, 47) = 2.89, p = 0.038, η 2 = 0.058 – p < 0.025 considered significant following correction for multiple ANOVAs] due to OXT effects occurring mainly for Chinese stimuli ( p = 0.014).

A marginally significant genome-wide genetic correlation was observed between telomere length and MF (LDSC r = 0.23, s.e.m. = 0.11, P = 0.038), similar in magnitude to what was reported for telomere length and MPN (LDSC r = 0.19, s.e.m. = 0.09, P = 0.037) 20 .

On the other hand, the LDL-C level in the MIN group with statin use decreased slightly and showed a marginally significant decrease at only 24 months compared to the baseline value ( p = 0.038).

The correlation between right and left two-back serial dependence was marginally significant (ρ = 0.46, p = 0.038, BF 10 = 0.83).

For the vowel context /u/, there was a marginally significant effect of condition, F (1, 9) = 5.90, p = .038.

Among the mediators, only distrust shows a marginally significant effect ( β = 0.026, p = 0.038), though this is offset by a non-significant negative path through realistic threat.

Although formal testing confirmed that the overall COVID-19 shock was statistically comparable across hospital types (paired t-test p = 0.917 for DDDs, p = 0.798 for expenditure; Supplementary Appendix Table S7 ), the stratified analysis revealed a marginally significant difference for intervention drugs specifically (general: -12.9% vs. specialized: -25.0%; paired t-test p = 0.038; Wilcoxon p = 0.063), warranting cautious interpretation of Round 2 findings in specialized hospitals.

Regarding episode duration, variance heterogeneity was indicated by Levene’s test, and although ANOVA yielded a marginally significant result ( p = 0.038), post hoc Tamhane’s T2 tests did not reveal specific group differences.

Normal stroma samples expressed significantly more DTF-specific genes than expected by chance (p ≤ 2e-16, χ 2 goodness of fit test), while the number of SFT-specific genes was marginally significant (p = 0.038, χ 2 goodness of fit test) (Additional files 6 (panel A), and 7).

At the cluster level, only amyloid burden and accumulation in the cluster 2 ROI could significantly predict changes in MMSE over time, with baseline amyloid being a significant predictor (β = −0.37, t = −3.0 P = .003), and its interaction with slope a marginally significant predictor (β = 14.16, t = 2.1, P = .038).

For measurements made at 8 weeks of age, a marginally significant association was observed between TI and death (OR = 0.64, 95% CI 0.41, 0.98; P = 0.038) which was strengthened when only infection-related deaths were included (OR = 0.27, 95% CI 0.14, 0.74; P = 0.008).

A marginally significant relationship could be detected for past history of gynaecological operations (IHC: p = 0.038, ELISA: p = 0.099), hormone replacement therapy (ELISA: p = 0.097) and alcohol intake (IHC: p = 0.098).

The three-way Stimulus Origin x Dimension x Valence interaction was marginally significant, F (1, 198.003) = 4.34, p = 0.038, but small, ƞ p 2 = 0.021, 95% CI [0.000, 0.076], indicating that the Dimension x Valence interaction differed between AI- and human-generated stimuli.

Difficult categories of verbal fluency For word rate, no significant result was found but a marginally significant interaction between the condition and the secondary task, F (1, 57) = 4.52, p = .038, η p 2 = . 07 .

As a result, only the connectivity between the insula and dACC was a marginally significant mediator from extraversion to β6 ( Fig. 4 B ; the coefficient for path c = 0.162, z = 2.611, p = 0.038).

This difference was marginally significant (Spearman rank ρ = 0.478, P = 0.038, df = 17). 5.3.3.

Although the mixing cost was marginally significant for Mandarin in the bootstrap test, it was significant in a one-tailed test ( p = 0.038).

Regarding awareness of the prevention and pathomechanism of infectious diseases, the overall Kruskal–Wallis test indicated a marginally significant difference based on the number of specialist exams ( p = 0.038).

There was a small marginally significant difference for skin satisfaction at 1 month follow up [ t (142) = 2.09, p = 0.038, d = 035].

For the hit rate during flanker test, the main effect, n-back level [ F (2, 113) = 6.5119, p = 0.002, ε = 0.821, η p 2 = 0.167] showed significance and marginally significant modulating effect of OSPAN was found[ F (2, 113) = 4.3889, p = 0.0385].

Demographic Covariates and Parenting Advice in Clinic Chi-square/Fisher's exact tests indicated that, overall, there were significant or marginally significant associations between parenting advice and resident race ( p = 0.0385), acculturation (i.e., number of generations in U.S.; p = 0.0630), and future plans ( p = 0.0449).