“marginally significant”

In addition, based on the criteria we set earlier that only those variables that were determined to be significant ( p <0.05) or marginally significant ( p <0.2) in the bivariate analyses were included in the subsequent path analysis, functional health status, helping others, and the use of community services were also included for further testing in the proposed path model.

We observed an increase of 20.7% [4.18%, 38.12%] in the peak activity level, and this was found to be marginally significant (sign-test, p = 0.21; t-test, p = 0.053).

In a multivariate analysis, only lesion side (beta = −3.92, t = −2.28, p = .06) remained marginally significant but not time ( t = 1.41, p = .21).

Interestingly, albeit marginally significant, students in the control group showed a relative increment in the self-reported use of supplements over time (Use (time1) = 4.9%; Use (time2) = 8.7%; p = 0.22, McNemar Test).

Delong test showed that the AUC of SII have marginally significant over PLR and NLR in predicting PFS ( P = 0.238, P = 0.133, respectively).

A Two-Way repeated measures ANOVA showed no significant genotype effect, while there was marginally significant interaction in time around cage [genotype effect, F (1, 42) = 1.425, p = 0.2393; genotype × side interaction, F (1, 42) = 3.790, p = 0.0583].

Silicon was marginally significant ( p = 0.24, p = 0.085, Fig. 2G ), as were calcium (both isotopes) and strontium ( p <0.1, data not shown).

The expression of miR-204-3p was significantly higher in serum exosomes from patients with mucinous cystic neoplasm than patients with IPMN ( p = 0.02, p = 0.007), while there was a marginally significant difference between mucinous cystic neoplasm and PC patients ( p = 0.24).

Collectively, these three variants showed a marginally significant association with lower one of the IOP measurements ( P = 0.24 and 0.0012 for corneal compensated and Goldman-correlated IOP, respectively, Fig 1 ), with the protein-altering allele p.Arg140His also showing a marginally significant effect on its own ( P = 1.3x10 -3 and 1.9x10 -3 for corneal compensated and Goldman-correlated IOP, respectively, Table 1 ).

There was a marginally significant interaction between group (hens with and without fractures) and hybrid (white and brown) for the difference in laying rates (GLM, group: F = 1.39, 1 df, p = 0.24, hybrid: F = 0.28, 1 df, p = 0.60, group*hybrid: F = 4.08, 1 df, p = 0.048).

The odds ratio of the rs662 GA + AA (192RQ + QQ) genotype in the adenocarcinoma group (OR = 0.59, p = 0.053) was marginally significant and lower than for other histological types (squamous cell carcinoma OR = 0.76, p = 0.246; other non-small cell carcinoma OR = 0.90, p = 0.658) (data not shown).

All marginally significant variables ( p < 0.25) in the univariate analysis were entered into the multivariate analysis (stepwise logistic regression model) as independent variables.

The initial multivariate model included the following five factors that were found to be significant or marginally significant ( i.e ., p < 0.25) based on the initial screen: initial cytogenetic, previous disease/prior SCT, age at transplant, transplant type/source and conditioning intensity.

Homogeneously Expressed Proteins and Genes within the Tumors and Associated Pathways Proteins with a stable expression (i.e., had a low CV) within minimum four tumors ( Section 4 ) ( n = 49) showed marginally significant (one-sided Fisher’s exact test, adj. p < 0.25) enrichment for signaling processes such as PI3K–AKT–mTOR signaling, EPH–ephrin signaling, oncogenic MAPK signaling and signaling by Rho GTPases ( Figure 3 a, Table S5 ).

All explanatory variables that were marginally significant on univariate analysis ( P < 0.25) were included in the full model.

Marginally significant variables with P< 0.25 in univariate analysis were included in multivariate analysis.

Stepwise backward procedure was used for modeling by including variables with significant or marginally significant association in the bivariate logistic regression (p-value <0.25).

All variables univariately statistically significant and marginally significant (according to Hosmer and Lemeshaw variables with p<0.250) entered the multiple logistic regression models.

To identify independent factors associated with the presence of DICS-M, significant or marginally significant bivariate risk factors ( p < 0.25 using the above tests) were examined using univariate and multivariable backward stepwise logistic regression analysis.

All variables univariately statistically significant and marginally significant (according to Hosmer and Lemeshow variables with p < 0.250) entered the multivariate logistic regression models (Enter method).

When adjusting for health information self-efficacy, the P value for the association of frequency of portal use and PCC was no longer marginally significant (step 4, column 3 of Table 2 , P =.25).

Factors that were remained marginally significant in the baseline model (P < 0.25) were included in the multivariable model.

By contrast, after PA combined with M1 anodal tDCS, there was a small (~7% absolute, 14% relative), marginally significant improvement in neglect (Time (F(5,45)=1.365, p=0.255; η 2 p = 0.132; planned contrast (post – pre): t(9)=1.781, p=0.05, 1-tail; mean difference: 6.519, SEM: 3.66; Cohen's d: 0.286), which was still evident at the latest post-test interval, 21 days later.

When the frequencies of the four E chromosome arrangements with absolute frequencies ≥ 5 (Table 3 ) were compared between sexes, they did not differ significantly in either case even though frequency differences were marginally significant in the 2015 sample (χ 2 = 3.986; d.f. = 3; P = 0.263; χ 2 = 6.594; d.f. = 3; P = 0.086, in the 2014 and 2015 samples, respectively).

Despite the Q ST of TTW being marginally significant, what is striking is that TRW, which is a component of DBH and RW, is not ( p = 0.2680).