“near-significant”

Ecosystem services trade-offs and synergies The NMDS plot and the ANOSIM did not show any significant difference between tillage and drought treatments in terms of global ecosystem services provision, although tillage had a near-significant effect (0.05 < P < 0.10) (Supplementary Fig.

Significant and near-significant (p<0.10) differences were then assessed further for independence in sequentially adjusted linear regression models: adjusting first for demographic factors (age, sex, ethnicity); next for retinopathy, neuropathy and BMI; next for blood pressure and antihypertensive medication; and finally for HbA1c.

Candidate predictors included baseline biomechanical parameters that showed significant or near-significant associations in univariable analyses ( p < 0.10) and/or were considered clinically relevant.

Deep GM SANDI metrics that showed near-significant differences, defined as unadjusted P < 0.10, were compared for each deep GM region (averaged between the two hemisphere) between people with MS and HC.

Notable near-significant differences (p < 0.1) are also indicated in the figures.

(2005) openness measure ( p = 0.03) and a near-significant predictor of the McCrae (2002) openness measure ( p = 0.10).

Significant (p < 0.05) or near-significant (p ≤ 0.1) interactions were followed by pairwise comparisons.

Significant or near-significant variables ( p < 0.1) in the bivariate analysis were added using the introduction method and those whose results were not significant in the model were discarded.

Overall, 14 variables had significant or near-significant association ( p ≤ 0.1) with low resilience ( Table 2 ).

Final models include all correlates with a significant ( P < .05) or near-significant (.05 < P <.10) likelihood ratio test while still achieving adequate fit, operationalized as P > .20 on the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test.

Covariates were chosen among expected major risk factors for fragility fractures, and significant or near-significant ( P < 0.10) parameters in simple correlations.

Interaction models that slightly improved model fit (i.e., lower AIC) and included statistically significant (p < 0.05) or near-significant (p < 0.10) interaction terms were reported in place of the main effects model.

Post hoc pairwise comparisons of the number of SRCs at different time intervals—thereby representing policy and rule changes—were performed using Tukey tests for significant or near-significant ( P < .10) models.

Conversely, the same correlations were either significant or near-significant ( p < 0.1) for the TTC patients (Time and WHO-5: r = 0.28, p = 0.08, n = 40; Time and ENS: r = −0.27, p = 0.09, n = 40; Time and MDI: r = −0.33, p = 0.04, n = 40; Time and ASS: r = −0.28, p = 0.08, n = 40), which is indicative of psychological improvement in the post-recovery phase of TTC.

Near-significant trends toward lower latencies to fall were detected for En2 +/− mice as compared to +/+ on these trials ( p <0.10 for each comparison).

Finally, the near-significant independence of HRB from income dynamics ( p = 0.102) suggests that behavioral drivers operate alongside, rather than subordinate to, economic capacity. 4.8.

However, a trend toward improvement over time was noted in proprioception measured during flexion, with a near-significant main effect of time (F(1,46.0) = 2.767, p = 0.103).

None of the other comparisons between single patients and the respective control groups revealed significant or near-significant differences with respect to saccade latencies and error rates (all p >.104).

Both groups displayed similar healthcare utilization patterns, though the χ2 test produced a near-significant result (χ2 = 4.490, P = 0.106).

4.55 Gy [18.7%]; p < 0.001), as opposed to near-significant reductions in D 2cc at sigmoid colon (15.1%; p = 0.11) and at small bowel (10.5%; p = 0.14).

Candidate factors associated with poor overall survival were distant tumours (HR = 2.85, 95% CI 1.77–4.59, p < 0.001), while improved overall survival was near-significant for patients with non-measurable contrast-enhancing residual tumour (HR = 0.68 [0.43–1.09], p = 0.11).

Experimental increases in 11KT levels were reflected in near-significant main effects on HSI ( F 3,20 = 2.258, P = 0.113; Fig. 2 B) and GSI ( F 3,20 = 3.010, P = 0.054; Fig. 2 C), but less so on oocyte diameter ( F 3,20 = 0.561, P = 0.647; Fig. 2 D); moreover, when defining dose as a continuous, rather than as a fixed variable, significant associations between implant dose and HSI ( R 2 = 0.19; P = 0.033) and GSI ( R 2 = 0.29; P = 0.007) were found (see Fig. 2 B and C).

Additionally, a near-significant difference was observed for the number of hours spent standing (p = 0.120), where those standing 6-10 hours had a slightly higher percentage of pain (60.2%) compared to those standing 3-6 hours (51.9%).

No significant differences were found based on managerial role, except for a near-significant difference in professional development scores among managers (M = 5.26 vs. 4.68, p = 0.123).

GTAA-ET), a near-significant difference was observed only in the anterolateral chest region (pain: p = 0.130, β = −0.100, 95% CI: −0.229 to 0.029; numbness: p = 0.051, β = −0.162, 95% CI: −0.326 to 0.001), with the GTSA-ET group exhibiting lower pain and numbness scores than the GTAA-ET group.