“marginally significant”

The Biocultural Identity Index (K) also shows a positive, though marginally significant, impact ( β = 0.015, p < 0.1), suggesting that cultural density supports health outcomes.

Statistical analyses The ten potential covariates (see above) were tested as candidate confounds, with covariates retained if they had any significant association with any of the three vagal tone measures, including any marginally significant ( p < 0.10) relationships.

In addition, marginally significant results at the 10% significance level ( p < 0.10), were also indicated.

Model 3 included both IF-based social capital and CS-based social capital and all covariates which were marginally significant ( p < 0.1) in the respective univariate analysis.

N1 The 2 × 2 repeated measures ANOVA showed a significant main effect of attention with attended stimuli triggering enhanced activity compared to unattended stimuli [ F (1,15) = 6.50, p < 0.05] and a marginally significant main effect of prediction with predictable stimuli triggering enhanced activity compared to unpredictable stimuli [ F (1,15) = 3.40, p < 0.10].

However, reductions in sexual IPV and severe physical/sexual IPV at endline among the women with disabilities had point estimates identical to those for women without disabilities, and remained marginally significant at the p<0.10 level.

After univariable analysis, potential predictor variables with respect to multivariable LR were identified based on whether or not they were significant (p<0.05) or marginally significant (0.05≤p<0.10).

However, it was marginally significant ( p < .1) for Korean American young adults in the comprehensive model, and for Filipino American young adults when considered in conjunction with the language spoken at home in the interaction model.

However, the Commercial treatment promoted an 18% reduction in g s compared with the Control ( p < 0.10, marginally significant) ( Figure 4 a).

There was also a marginally significant effect for Condition ( F (3,87) = 2.36, P < 0.10).

Only pairs with a significant ( P < 0.05) or marginally significant ( P < 0.1) difference are shown.

In contrast, only EC and MDNN had marginally significant correlations with SOC ( p < 0.1) in the YNNR site.

Fear of COVID-19 had a significant positive correlation ( rs = 0.36-0.42, ps < 0.01) with the three subscales of the DASS (depression, anxiety, stress), and a marginally significant negative correlation with future life satisfaction ( r = -.07, p < .10).

The relevant coefficient was also marginally significant for migration between SA4s (OR = 0.91; p < 0.1).

However, only three items were statistically significant at p < 0.05 level or marginally significant at p < 0.10 level (see Table 3 ).

For the relationships between the antecedent and outcome variables as mediated by PIC, the indirect effects were significant for perspective-seeking to TDOB ( B = 0.14, p < .05; .95% CI [−0.02, .30]), and marginally significant for trust to KWKW ( B = 0.18, p < .10; 95% CI [−0.01, .43]) Discussion and conclusion The set of studies in this manuscript aimed to create a reliable and valid measure of the perspective integration capability of individuals working in expertise diverse collaborations.

At T1, a multinomial logistic regression showed a marginally significant association (0.05 < p < 0.10) between CCMI and membership in the Moderately Attained profile: increasing CCMI by one standard deviation doubled the odds of being in that profile compared to the Devalued/ Ambivalent profile.

Results were considered significant at P < 0.05 and marginally significant at 0.05 ≤ P < 0.10.

Statistically significant (p < 0.05) and marginally significant (p < 0.1) variables in univariate analysis were included in multivariate analysis.

At average levels of baseline self-compassion, participants demonstrated a marginally significant decrease from pre- to post-intervention in depression ( B = −0.02, p = 0.10).

Among sister‐only families, the estimated coefficient is larger and marginally significant ( b = 0.0198, p < .1), whereas the association is smaller and not statistically significant among brother‐only families (b = 0.0111, n.s.).

All statistically marginally significant prognostic factors which identified by univariate analysis ( P < 0.1) were entered into a Cox proportion hazards regression model with forward stepwise (Likelihood ratio) to identify independent predictors of VAP event.

Despite limited power, sensitivity analyses restricting the comparison group to participants with a history of no infections (for example, influenza versus no history of any infection) showed consistent atrophy linked to influenza, herpes viruses, miscellaneous viral infections and LRTIs, with URTI- and skin and subcutaneous infection-related atrophy remaining marginally significant ( P ≤ 0.10) ( Supplementary Table 4 ).

Tumor Perfusion Changes Mean blood flow and volume declined significantly ( P < .05) between baseline and the first recheck for the whole tumor and was marginally significant for the tumor center ( P < .1) based on raw P value although none were significant after adjusting for multiple testing (FDR <0.05) (Table 1 ).

Because of the small sample size in this pilot study, we also report marginally significant results (p < .10), and are careful to interpret these results with caution.