“marginally significant”

AmB-LLs produced a marginally significant 1.6-fold and 1.8-fold reductions in fungal burden relative to the buffer treated infected controls (P = 0.087 to 0.012).

In contrast, a subgroup analysis in patients with HIV infection identified a marginally significant difference in mean age (5.42, 95% CI −0.79–11.63; p = 0.087).

8.4 %), with a marginally significant difference (p = 0.087), suggesting a potential link between shorter sleep duration and central obesity ( Table 3 ). 3.3.4.

Cluster 1 in response to J Mos2 Gag stimulation showed marginally significant differences between cases and controls for the vaccine recipients (p-value = 0.087 and FDR-q = 0.174) ( Supplementary Table S7 ), with higher expression in cases compared to controls ( Fig. 5 B and Supplementary Figure S7 ).

Also the population origin had a marginally significant effect ( P = 0.087), so that fish from Lake Kangasjärvi had higher probability to become captured than fish collected from the aquaculture ponds ( P = 0.029).

Repigmentation among recipients followed a complex pattern, with a marginally significant three-way interaction between treatment, time, and colony ( P = .087).

When directly correlating decision-making performance and confidence for the correct trials, there was a strong correlation between these measures for HV trials (r = 0.77, p <0.001), while there was only a weak and marginally significant correlation for LV arrows (r = 0.23, p = 0.087, Figure 1J ).

The model also included a residual covariance between S‐LRP and R‐LRP latencies, which was marginally significant ( β = −0.12, z = −1.71, p = 0.087).

The results revealed a significant main effect of conditions, F (2,78) = 3.146, p = 0.049, η p 2 = 0.075, and a marginally significant interaction effect between groups and conditions, F (2,78) = 3.073, p = 0.087, η p 2 = 0.073, suggesting that the degree of conformity varied across two different groups (see Fig. 2A ).

Disentangling this marginally significant effect [reward×task-switching×medication×DAT1: F (1,21)=3.23; P =0.087] showed that 9R-carrying patients OFF medication tended to show a greater switch cost on high than low reward trials compared with these patients ON their medication [reward×task-switching×medication in 9R carriers: F (1,11)=4.40; P =0.06; Fig. 2 c].

However, the covariate leaf length was marginally significant (Leaf length: χ 2 = 2.91, df = 1, P = 0.087); dodder attached marginally slower to hosts with longer leaves (β = -0.22).

There was a marginally significant relationship between neural oscillations preceding the behavioural response and mean response times in older adults, but not younger adults ( p = 0.087, crossblock covariance: 83%).

Contagious disease cue without versus with a reminder of quarantine condition We found a significant main effect of local severity ( b = -0.010, t = -2.91, p = 0.004), but the interaction between local severity and condition was marginally significant ( b = 0.008, t = 1.72, p = 0.087).

When each hemisphere within each ROI was individually analyzed regarding the response to the contralateral and ipsilateral visual field, paired t‐tests showed that the left hemisphere OFA showed a significant difference ( t 6 = 3.98, p = .007) and the right hemisphere OFA was marginally significant ( t 5 = 2.12, p = .087), but neither hemisphere in FFA showed a consistent difference (all t ‐values < 1.8, all p ‐values > .10).

The association was statistically significant for several SF-36 scales, bodily pain ( P = 0.0129), general health ( P = 0.0148), vitality ( P = 0.027) and social functioning ( P = 0.0198), and marginally significant for the role emotional scale ( P = 0.0872). 29 An observational study that used data from NHANES (2001–2004) also reported a significant adverse effect of hypertension awareness on HRQoL. 8 Recently, a population survey in southwestern Finland (2005–2006) reported that the physical component of HRQ

Monocyte purity was 90.31 ± 2.5% with EasySep and 94.98 ± 1.91% with MACS, a difference that was marginally significant ( p = 0.0873, Table 1 ).

We also recovered a marginally significant relationship between GR gain rates and diet breadth (χ 2 = 6.5620, df = 3–47, P = 0.0873), indicating that broad polylectic species showed higher gain rates than polylectic species (β = 0.00376, SE = 0.00153, t = 2.450, P = 0.0606).

The cross species comparison comes to the conclusion that there are more nonsynonymous SNPs within human population than expected (the difference is statistically significant with orangutan, P = 0.0479, and are marginally significant with chimpanzee, P = 0.0875, and rhesus macaque, P = 0.0517) ( Fig. 1 ).

The genotype × parental treatment interaction effect was significant for total leaf area and mean single-leaf area ( Table 1 , p = 0.0292 and 0.0536, respectively), and the genotype × offspring treatment interaction effect was significant or marginally significant for all traits ( Table 1 , 0.0283 ≤ p ≤ 0.0879).

For all of the subjects (n = 63), significant interaction between gender and temporal pole GMV at Time 2 (b = 2.76, p = 0.0052) and marginally significant interaction between gender and hippocampal GMV at Time 2 (b = 2.18, p = 0.088) were observed for longitudinal perfusion declines in the temporoparietal region.

When we compared fungal composition differences with PSF values to determine whether community‐wide fungal changes were associated with PSFs, we found that soils with more distinct fungal communities were marginally associated with the magnitude of PSFs ( r s = .73; S = 22, p = .046; Figure S6 ), although the relationship weakens and is no longer marginally significant for negative PSFs only ( r s = .71, p = .088).

Patients with abnormal ENG had lower neural density; however, in our study cohort, this was marginally significant ( p = 0.0880).

Not undergoing post-OLT CRRT was also a marginally significant predictor of removal from dialysis (HR = 1.43, 95% CI = 0.95 to 2.14, p = 0.088; Table 3 ).

We also observed a marginally significant speech stimulus by face context interaction F(1, 33) = 3.089, p = 0.088, η 2 = 0.086.

When the analyses were limited to the dyads who had same examiners at pre- and post-interventions (n = 75 out of 140 dyads; 53.6%), the interaction effect between time and treatment condition remained marginally significant, potentially due to limited statistical power ( F [1, 183] = 2.94, p = 0.088 for child latency; F [1, 183] = 2.83, p = 0.095 for examiner latency).