“marginally significant”

A multivariate analysis of variance was performed, with marital status as the between-subject variable and intention as the within-subject variable; The multivariate analysis of variance yielded a marginally significant main effect [F (2,122) = 2.62, p = 0.077, ɳ 2 = 0.04].

Fatigue and anxiety scores emerged as marginally significant predictors of ACE-III Global ( R 2 (adjusted) = 0.021, F (1, 100) = 3.200, p = .077) and ACE-III Fluency scores ( R 2 (adjusted) = 0.026, F (1, 100) = 3.735, p = .056), respectively.

The age- and gender-adjusted BOLD–CSF coupling was also compared across different apolipoprotein E (APOE) gene carriers and showed a marginally significant ( p = 0.077) dependency on the copies of APOE ε4 alleles ( Fig 2D ).

Mid3rd exhibited a significant decrease with age before COVID-19 infection ( p = 0.021), and npxG showed a marginally significant decrease with age before COVID-19 infection ( p = 0.077).

For rearranged pairs, the stability of the latent score was marginally significant ( p = .077).

Univariate ANCOVAs indicated a significant effect for scenario 1, F (1, 95) = 9.11, p = 0.003, η p 2 = 0.088, and scenario 3, F (1, 95) = 5.04, p = 0.027, η p 2 = 0.050, and a marginally significant effect for scenario 2, F (1, 95) = 3.20, p = 0.077, η p 2 = 0.033.

The contribution of the absent predictor was significant for lag 3 ( p = .037), marginally significant for lag 2 (p = .077), and not significant for the other lags.

Furthermore, the former had a higher frequency of high fracture risk than the latter, although the difference was marginally significant (52.5% vs. 37.3%; p = 0.077; Figure S2 A).

In the FST, a significant interaction effect [ F (1, 30) = 7.366, p < 0.05] and marginally significant effect of stress [ F (1, 30) = 3.337, p = 0.077] and virus [ F (1, 30) = 2.743, p = 0.108] were observed; Post-hoc analysis revealed that CSDS mice injected with Asct2-shRNA showed significant decrease in immobility compared to the SCR-shRNA-injected CSDS group (CSDS-shSCR vs.

A third cluster located in the left VS showed marginally significant reduced activation in PDP as compared to PD patients [peak MNI coordinates x, y, z = −16, 16, −2; peak z = 3.03; peak p = 0.077 (small volume corrected); voxels = 44].

There was a marginally significant association between increasing proportion of PD-L1 expression on immune cells and intratumoral CD8+ T cell densities ( p = 0.0773).

Noninfective aphids significantly preferred to settle on BYDV-infected wheat compared to infective aphids at the first 12-h observation point (generalized linear model; χ 2 = 3.12, p = 0.0774, marginally significant) ( Fig. 2a , Supplementary Table S1a ) and throughout the duration of the experiment (generalized linear model; χ 2 = 19.33, p < 0.0001) ( Fig. 2b , Supplementary Table S2a ).

An HBsAg decline of ≥75% at Month 3 of treatment was a marginally significant factor ( p = 0.0777, Supplementary Table S1 ).

The water balloon construct demonstrated a marginally significant trend of decreased stiffness ( P = .0778; Figure 13 ) when compared to both the intact and nucleus replacement device constructs.

The ANOVA indicated a marginally significant difference in knowledge means among the three groups being compared ( p value = 0.078).

Additionally, greater reductions in overall perceived stress were observed for the intervention as compared to wait-list control group (though the unstandardized beta coefficient was marginally significant, p = .078, the standardized beta coefficient was statistically significant, β = -.29, 95% CI [-0.57, -0.01], p = .041).

The main effect of emotion was marginally significant in this model F (2, 338.05) = 2.57, p = 0.078.

Post-hoc t -tests showed that the log-transformed theta power of the control group had a marginally significant decrease from 1-back tasks to 2-back tasks (0.542 − 0.564 = − 0.022, p = 0.078, d = − 0.35).

The heritability for the male mean rate, to our knowledge the first such estimate, was also marginally significant (h 2 = 0.14; p = 0.078).

The Stimulus type (T, [VT + nostim – V]) × Group (deaf, hearing) ANOVA on P100 amplitudes revealed a marginally significant main effect of Stimulus type, F (1, 18) = 3.50, p = 0.078, with larger amplitudes for [VT + nostim – V] than for unisensory tactile responses T ( M = 4.0 vs. 3.2 μV), indicating a tendency for multisensory interactions about 100 ms after stimulus presentation in both deaf and hearing participants.

Although we detected a marginally significant post-fledging period × fate × species effect (PBtest = 3.43, nsim =1000, P = 0.078), post-hoc pairwise comparisons indicated that catbirds and wood thrushes used areas similarly between fates within pre- and post-fledging periods (t.ratios ranged between − 2.21 and 1.40, P > 0.35, in all cases).

The difference across platforms in the moderating effect of partisanship on the treatment effect was significant for people who voted for Trump versus those who did not ( p = 0.033), marginally significant for participants’ preference for the Democratic versus Republican party ( p = 0.078), and not significant for Democratic versus Republican party membership ( p = 0.198); although these results should be interpreted cautiously in light of low statistical power.

Although there was no statistically significant difference at the conventional level ( P < 0.05), the polypharmacy group exhibited a marginally significant association with an increased risk of having BMS (OR = 2.066, 95% CI: 0.922–4.630, P = 0.078, Table 3 ).

We found statistically significant correlations between age and relational support at 14 years of age (r = − 0.05; p = 0.021), whereas the correlation was marginally significant for relational support at 12 years ( p = 0.078) and relational tensions at 14 years of age ( p = 0.054).

Furthermore, the timebank group displayed a marginally significant increase in volunteering hours beyond the HA program compared to the control group at T2 (β = 1.02, 95% CI: −0.11, 2.15, p = .078).