These negative correlations were not a generic consequence of clade 2 being on the chromosome and clades 3 and 4 on plasmids, since the correlation of clade 1 (also on the chromosome) and clade 3 was positive (marginally statistically significant, P = 0.05).
← all phrases
“marginally statistically significant”
Sighted at
p=0.08
In the literature
In the generalized linear model for MIH, the interaction term between race and postoperative uterine weight was marginally statistically significant ( p =0.05).
The indirect comparisons of efficacy between tofacitinib and control was marginally statistically significant at P < 0.05 in the NMA of all 16 trials and became significant after removing the 1 trial deemed high risk of bias.
There was a marginally statistically significant difference in reported race among patients with SIS in the PRE versus POST periods ( p = 0.05).
Compared with the control group, the semisynthetic tetracycline‐containing quadruple regimen with a 14‐day duration demonstrated a marginally statistically significant difference in the eradication rate (OR = 1.34, 95% CI: 1.01–1.79; p = 0.05), thus suggesting that the 14‐day course may have a certain role in improving eradication efficacy; however, the results should be interpreted with caution.
The model explained 5.5% of the variance in PS in relation to the team leader (Adjusted R 2 = 0.055), but the variance was marginally statistically significant ( F (4.97) = 2.469, p = 0.050). 6.
Here, the only marginally statistically significant effect is the reduced P2 amplitude in the Foreign condition ( p = 0.05).
Chromosomal aberrations of GS-intestinal and GS-diffuse tumors were similar with only a few marginally statistically significant ( p < 0.05; FDR < 0.27) differences between these two subgroups: losses of chromosomes 4p16.3, 6q14.1–q15, and 10p12.31–p12.1 occurred more often in GS-intestinal than GS-diffuse tumors, whereas gains of chromosome 8 occurred more often in GS-diffuse than GS-intestinal tumors.
However, this difference was marginally statistically significant only for ETR rates (cirrhotics: 87% versus noncirrhotics: 97%, P = 0.05). 3.2.
After exposure to pool air, there was a small decrease (0.8 FEV % ) that was marginally statistically significant (p=0.05).
Sex differences in knowledge were marginally statistically significant ( p < 0.05), while academic level showed no significant association.
In eight of the 11 questions, a statistically significant difference was recorded at p<0.001 (questions 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, and 11), and in the two marginally statistically significant differences, p = 0.05 (questions 4 and 10) were established.
After adjusting for age, race/ethnicity, gender, occupation, patient contact, and having young children in the household, we observed an increase in the odds of reporting unplanned absenteeism for each score increment in overall burnout scores, but the association was only marginally statistically significant: (OR = 1.02, 95% CI: 1.00–1.03, p = 0.05).
The difference between subgroups was marginally statistically significant (Chi2=3.84, df=1, P = 0.05, I2=73.9%).
The association between pregnancy and repeat positive test was marginally statistically significant ( P = 0.05).
The Hp 2-1 genotype had 2.64 (1.0–7.08) higher odds of CAD than the Hp 1-1 genotype; however, this was marginally statistically significant ( p = 0.05).
The regression coefficients β 0 = 0.0701 (SE = 0.0152), β 2 = 0.0370 (SE = 0.0065), β 3 = 0.0194 (SE = 0.0056) and β 6 = 0.0008 (SE = 0.0003) were marginally statistically significant at P = 0.05 and R 2 = 0.726.
Although the overall difference across the four groups was only marginally statistically significant ( P = 0.050; Supplementary Figure S5 ), patients treated with PI-based regimens demonstrated a higher survival probability than patients who received conventional treatments (Bonferroni adjusted P = 0.029).
Results Opposite sex A marginally statistically significant interaction effect between the romantic prime and viewer's sex on attitude toward the male model ad was observed [ t = 1.65, p = 0.05 (one-tailed)].
Marginally statistically significant differences existed in general EBM knowledge scores among the different levels of familiarity with EBM (p = 0.05).
[ 31 ] found that excessive GWG was associated with higher Staphylococcus in colostrum (p = 0.05; marginally statistically significant) and lower Bifidobacterium at 1 month (p = 0.03).
Even if mean PPD did not reach a statistically significant value, the results showed that mean CAL was marginally statistically significant ( p = 0.05).
This difference was marginally statistically significant in an independent sample t -test (t(4) = 2.7, p = 0.05).
Of the six possible pairwise correlations, we found only one that was marginally statistically significant at p < 0.05—a finding that could easily be the result of chance fluctuations and multiple comparisons.
The analysis indicated that the overall model was marginally statistically significant (F = 2.507, df1 = 2, df2 = 48, p = 0.050) and explained 9.5% of the variance in the number of maternal symptoms (R2 = 0.095).