“marginally significant”

1b ) was decreased (mechanical hyperalgesia) by 10% (not significant; p > 0.05) and 16% (marginally significant; p = 0.05), respectively, compared with control rats.

There were marginally significant between strata differences in the relationship of opioid misuse and PHQ-9 score (interaction p -value = 0.050).

With that said, when we look at the relationship between iconicity and modification within the different sign types, we find that the correlation between iconicity and modification holds for signs produced in neutral space ( r = .47, p = .02), for two‐handed signs ( r = .51, p = .01), and for nondirectional signs ( r = .89, p < .001), and is marginally significant for symmetrical signs ( r = .57, p = .05).

Crucially, the interaction between cue validity and direction congruency was marginally significant ( F (1, 19) = 4.37, p = 0.050, η p 2 = 0.19), suggesting potential interference of peripheral BM on arrow-induced attention.

The use of pharmacotherapy and non-assigned treatment types showed a small but marginally significant correlation: r 1028 = .061, P = .05.

The variables soil hydrologic group and permeability variables were found to be marginally significant ( p =0.05 and 0.045, respectively).

Also, RD showed a marginally significant decrease in left amygdala (p = 0.05).

There were no significant associations in the final adjusted model, though income was marginally significant ( p = 0.05).

The proportion of mixed breed cats in the SS group was considered significantly different from the FU and DR groups’ in both the likelihood ratio ( p ≈ 0.05—marginally significant) and the Pearson’s ( p < 0.001) chi-square test.

Regarding DED symptoms, a marginally significant trend in DEQ-5 scores was observed, in which patients with elevated TC (>200 mg/dl) and LDL levels (>130 mg/dl) reported more severe DED symptoms ( p < 0.05) ( Figure 1(c) ).

Focusing on the test phase, we first ran a repeated measures ANOVA on test performance as a function of trial (old, new) and condition (conceptual, neutral), which revealed a main effect of trial ( F (1, 23) = 28.38, p < 0.001, partial η 2 = 0.55), a marginally significant main effect of condition ( F (1,23) = 4.37, p = 0.05, partial η 2 = 0.16), and a significant trial x condition interaction ( F (1,23) = 6.95, p = 0.01, partial η 2 = 0.23).

Using significant meQTLs on chromosome 1, analyses using only African American samples ( N = 112) showed that 99.91% of the meQTLs were directionally consistent with the full analysis, with 92% marginally significant ( P < 0.05) and 66% genome-wide significant (FDR < 0.01) in the smaller sample size and an overall sharing of π 1 = 0.995.

38.0±9.1 minutes), and this difference was marginally significant (P=0.05).

We found that AC016876.1 showed marginally significant lower expression in Basal-like than Her2 patients with uninvolved lymph node (stage ;N0; P=0.05; Wilcoxon test; Figure S1H ).

docetaxel treatment were positive for PFS ( P = .040) and marginally significant for OS ( P = .050), indicating that the presence of an ATM mutation may predict better outcomes with atezolizumab in the high bTMB subgroup (eTable 10).

However, sexes did vary slightly at other points in the session—males appeared to freeze more in block 2, although this was marginally significant ( p = 0.050), and females froze more in block 6 ( p = 0.032).

The meta-analyses revealed that esketamine was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of nausea (RR = 0.69; 95% CI: 0.50–0.94; p = 0.02; I 2 = 75%) and a marginally significant reduction in vomiting (RR = 0.72; 95% CI: 0.51–1.00; p = 0.05; I 2 = 71%).

Pairwise comparisons showed that clients of the PSP Wellbeing Course experienced a statistically significant reduction in symptoms between pre-treatment and post-treatment on the PHQ-9, GAD-7, PCL-5, DAR-5, and PDSS-SR, all p 's < .001 and a marginally significant reduction in symptoms on the SIAS-6/SPS-6, p = .05.

The interaction of block and training type was marginally significant, F (3.18, 248.30) = 2.59, p = .05, η p 2 = .032, as accuracy increased more across blocks in the Response conditions than in the Observation conditions.

Deleting Demmer’s study [ 63 ] would reduce the effect size and obtain a marginally significant result (RR = 1.17, 95% CI 0.99–1.39, p > 0.05).

There was a main effect of motion type ( F1 (2,60) = 11.27, p < 0.0001, η p 2 = 27.3, observed power = 0.99; F2 (2,32) = 9.75, p < 0.0001, η p 2 = 37.9, observed power = 0.972), and a marginally significant effect of verb type in the participants analysis ( F1 (1,30) = 4.16, p = 0.05, η p 2 = 12.2, observed power = 0.506), and in the items analysis ( F2 (1, 16) = 4.14, p = 0.059, η p 2 = 20.5, observed power = 0.481).

A pooled analysis revealed that the association with hand hygiene was statistically significant for pros (OR = 1.35, p < .001), while marginally significant for cons (OR = 0.87, p = .05; Table 2 ).

However, the coefficient for the Bmal1 −/− SCN was slightly positive and marginally significant (mean r s = 0.07±0.0336 SEM, t -test, p <0.05).

Endorsing the statement “vaccines may cause homosexuality” increased the risk of non-vaccination status approximately 11 times ( P = .050, 95% Cl = 1.10-144.77) ( P = .050 is accepted as marginally significant). Having a non-psychiatric comorbid disease reduced the risk of non-vaccination status ( P = .016, 95% Cl = 0.07-0.76).

In these models, sRAGE showed marginally significant independent associations with age (β = 0.23, p = 0.05) and 24 hour albumin excretion (β = 0.18, p = 0.05) while esRAGE was independently associated with age only (β = 0.23, p = 0.05).