“marginally significant”

The difference in the mean±SD age was marginally significant (p=0.09) between the IPD and no-IPD groups (37.89±2.61 vs 37.35±2.37).

The interaction between form realism and behavioral realism on competence was marginally significant ( F (1,198) = 2.92, p = 0.09).

Permutation tests comparing TAFs and TLFs showed that of the six interaction attributes tested, only nestedness and centralization betweenness showed marginally significant differences between TAFs and TLFs ( p = 0.090 and 0.088, respectively; Table S8 ). 3.3.

For both the daily difference score and recall after one day models, there was a marginally significant difference between the overall in-vivo score model compared to the individual drink in-vivo scores model ( p = 0.09).

When order was added to the model, there was only a marginally significant finding between video condition and post-peak decline in oxytocin, b = 0.005, SE = 0.003, p = 0.09.

Among these clinical data, a significant correlation was observed between TRS parts A & B and TETRAS and between TRS part C and TETRAS-ADL (Pearson’s: r = 0.61 P = 3.542E-5; r = 0.47 P = 0.003), and a marginally significant correlation was observed between HDRS-17 scores and education level (Pearson’s r = 0.27 P = 0.09) in the depressed ET patients.

The eyes in this group exhibited some typical glaucoma-like features, such as marginally significant higher IOP (18.7 vs. 16.4 mm Hg, P = 0.09), enlarged cupping (0.62 vs. 0.52, P = 0.03), and RNFL wedge defects as seen on fundus pictures; however, these features were not considered for inclusion in the study or control group but rather observational outcomes.

Interestingly, all four sexual systems are present in both subgenera, with a statistically similar frequency ( P > 0.43 for all the sexual systems, except for hermaphroditism, that showed marginally significant differences P = 0.09) (Fig. 3 ).

Unlike RT for the reversals, a marginally significant sex × test type interaction was found ( F (1,14) = 3.33, p = 0.09, partial η 2 = 0.19).

We compared the locomotor response to morphine of these two groups, and marginally significant difference was found [main effects of group (successful/ failed): F 1, 45 = 3.01, P = 0.09; time: F 13, 585 = 11.17, P <0.001; interaction: F 13, 585 = 3.54, P <0.001; Fig 2A ].

Comparing the correlation between maternal AQ and MEPC scores by assumed child’s gender A marginally significant negative correlation was observed between maternal AQ total and MEPC total scores in both genders (boys: r = –0.06, p = 0.09; girls: r = –0.25, p = 0.08).

In both species, the normalized RNA:DNA ratio was positively related to the total food uptake as reflected by the CINC+NINC values, the effect being significant for Eurytemora ( R 2 = 0.63, p < 0.03) and marginally significant for Acartia ( R 2 = 0.40, p > 0.09; Figure 4 and Supplementary Table S8 ).

In drug overdose suicides, the difference between the mean age of men (53.78 ± 15.13) and women (45.00 ± 17.33) is marginally significant ( p = 0.090).

These effects were both driven by box × group interactions, with the happy condition significant ( F (1,38) = 9.42, p = .004, η 2 = .20) and the fear condition marginally significant ( F (1,38) = 2.85, p = .09, η 2 = .07, respectively).

In chitosan-treated plants, peroxidase activity in the shoot (0.66 ± 0.11 ΔOD/min·mg protein) was not different from that in control plants but was doubly increased in root tissues (30.80 ± 8.06 ΔOD/min·mg protein) with a marginally significant difference (p-value = 0.09) as relative to control.

Education showed a marginally significant negative association with vulnerability scores ( B = −0.59, SE = 0.35, p =.09), whereas age was not significantly related.

Visual inspection of funnel plots suggested the presence of a marginally significant publication bias and of small‐study effect, confirmed by the Egger test ( P =0.09) only for the outcome of any adverse event.

The results indicate that the 9-month-olds showed a marginally significant change when the goal-related accuracy rate was compared to the identity-related accuracy rate, Z = −1.69, p = 0.09, but no significant change when it was compared to location-related accuracy rate: Z = −0.04, p = 0.97.

Nonetheless, it should be noted that the interaction effect of renal dysfunction (creatinine level) and treatment was marginally significant (P-value = 0.090), suggesting the higher adverse effect of DIG+/BB+ on mortality in patients with renal dysfunction comorbidity.

No significant differences were found in the TELP and control groups, except in MBI (mean change 2.5, P = 0.04) and GDS (mean change 2, P = 0.03), and a marginally significant change in MMSE (mean change 1.33, P = 0.09) in TELP.

By contrast for women, the correlation between serum triglycerides and cIMT was null, whereas the correlation of CRF with cIMT was marginally significant in models 1 and 2 (standardized β: 0.131 and 0.132; both p = 0.09).

Marginally significant differences were found in comparison between the early and baseline periods ( t = −1.68, p = 0.09; β′ = −0.06, 95%, CI [−0.13, 0.01]).

Post hoc analyses showed that children in the low grade responded more slowly than the children in middle and high grades (ps < 0.05), and children from the middle grade exhibited longer reaction times than the ones in the high grades (p = 0.09, marginally significant).

In the age-adjusted multinomial logistic regression model (Aim 1: Table 2 ) examining the association between current drug use and history of MOUD use among the full sample (N = 284), the association between past 30-day heroin/fentanyl use and past MOUD use (ref: never) was marginally significant (aOR = 1.90; 95% CI = 0.90–4.02; p = 0.09), and there was no significant association between past 30-day heroin/fentanyl use and current MOUD use ( p = 0.31).

In short, they showed that performing only an F 1 test dramatically increases Type 1 errors especially for between-item manipulations (in that respect, it is interesting to remark that a classical repeated measures F 1 analysis on the data of the main experiment of Experiment 2 yielded a marginally significant effect of word type ( F 1 (1,19) = 3.3, p = .09)).