“marginally significant”

The overall eradication rate for those first treated at the Center was 80.0% (n=90) in the former period and 88.7% (n=124) in the latter period; the difference was marginally significant (χ 2 =3.11, p=0.078).

The specific analysis also showed a reduction in the amount of LbGAP2 for parasitoids reared at 30 °C, although it was only significant between 25 °C and 30 °C ( Figure 6 , p = 0.017) and marginally significant between 20 and 30 °C ( Figure 6 , p = 0.078).

In addition, a marginally significant effect of group was detected in the right NAc, adjusted P = .078.

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).

Kaplan–Meier analysis showed that SATB1-high group had a worse overall survival ( P =0.078, marginally significant).

This indicates a reduced but marginally significant (p = 0.078) greater estimated proportion of Mtb infection as defined by TST compared to IGRA even when restricting our sample to a population where the possibility of BCG cross-reactivity was minimized.

The multivariate analysis identified a significant correlation between the age group of ≥ 40 years and a high ( P =0.018; Figure 2 ), as well as a marginally significant association between the presence of transcription-related gene mutations and an improved ORR ( P =0.078; Figure 2 ).

There was a marginally significant interaction of grammaticality and WM proficiency ( Estimate = 0.036, SE = 0.02, df = 20.2, t = 1.854, p = 0.078), suggesting that higher Spanish reading proficiency may improve ability to correctly accept the grammatical sentences.

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

The Semantic relation × Sensory-motor relation interaction was also marginally significant [ F (1, 22) = 3.41, p = 0.078], but given its theoretical relevance we also explored the corresponding simple effects.

For blueback herring, changes in mean length showed marginally significant differences among stocks ( F 3, 13 = 2.861, P = 0.078), with the Southern New England and Mid-Atlantic Stocks declining more steeply than the Northern New England and Southern Atlantic Stocks (although Tukey's HSD did not reveal any pairwise differences to be significant) ( Fig. 5 C; Fig.

In addition, the Effort by Group by Capacity three-way interaction produced a marginally significant effect, F (2.527, 101.063) = 2.45, MSe = 0.039, p = 0.078, η 2 p = 0.058.

For the compartment preference data the main effect of AGE was marginally significant ( F 1,41 = 3.28, P = 0.078) and a significant main effect of GENOTYPE was observed ( F 1,41 = 7.50, P = 0.009).

On the other hand, a GLM (with log-transformed detection distances as response variable, normal distribution and identity function) showed no differences between species (Wald κ 2 = 0.91, d f = 1, p = 0.327) nor an effect of flock size (Wald κ 2 = 1.48, d f = 1, p = 0.233), with a marginally significant effect of habitat (Wald κ 2 = 5.11, d f = 2, p = 0.078).

We observed a marginally significant correlation between the resistance to Meropenem and the consumption of Imipenem 1 month before ( p = 0.078), but surprisingly not with the consumption of Meropenem.

A marginally significant correlation also emerged between children’s above chance performance with differently colored cups in 90° and 180° rotations, ρ( n = 24) = 0.37, p = 0.078.

In the final multivariable Cox proportional hazards model ( Table 4 ), affect dysregulation ( p = .003), internalizing symptoms ( p = .019), and positive cannabis expectancies ( p = .001) remained positively associated with cannabis initiation; externalizing symptoms was marginally significant ( p = .078). 4.

In addition, satisfaction with memory was identified as a marginally significant predictor of depression ( p = 0.078) and stress ( p = 0.096).

The between-group difference in PR was significant for startle probe 2 [ t (24) = 2.51, p = 0.019], while the difference in PR was marginally significant for startle probe 1 [ t (24) = 1.84, 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.

There was a marginally significant correlation between serum IL-6 levels and TSAT in 34 peritoneal dialysis patients (r = 0.067, p = 0.078) [ 24 ].

Mindfulness and leader trustworthiness As shown in Table 2 , the particularized pathway of leader trustworthiness did not significantly predict mindful attention, γ = .03 [95% CI:–.07, .13], t (999) = 0.53, p = .600, while the generalized pathway was marginally significant: γ = .16 [95% CI:–.02, .34], t (177) = 1.78, p = .078.

However, the effect of age was significant only for 1,2-BQ-Alb among low-exposed subjects ( p = 0.018) and was marginally significant for 1,4-BQ-Alb among high-exposed subjects ( p = 0.078); the effect of BMI was significant only for 1,4-BQ-Alb for subjects exposed to ≥ 1 ppm benzene ( p = 0.014).

In the crude model (step 1), the associations between being bullied and work engagement were marginally significant ( β = .032, P = .078); however, being bullied at school ( β = .042, p = .018) was significantly and positively associated with work engagement after adjusting for demographic characteristics in step 2.

After Bonferroni corrections, two marginally significant correlations were found: a positive correlation between medium beeps and the perceptual abilities subscale of Gold-MSI ( r = .344, p = .078), and a negative one between short balls and the emotions subscale ( r = .349, p = .072).