“nominally significant”

A single nominally significant finding (procedure–LIX, p = 0.031, ε 2 = 0.05) would not remain significant after correcting for multiple comparisons.

There was a nominally significant relationship between TL and preeclampsia (PE) in the IVW model (OR: 0.799; 95% CI: 0.651-0.979; P = 0.031).

Interestingly, one suggestive signal for tau‐PET on Chr7 ( CRYGN,RHEB /rs12538040, MAF = 0.196, P = 3.80E‐07, β = −0.84) was also nominally significant with the same direction for p‐tau217 ( P = 0.032, β = −0.21). 3.4 Mult‐trait GWAS Multi‐trait GWAS was performed on a subset of 76 participants from ABC‐DS with all four tau biomarker measurements available, aiming to identify pleiotropic loci that simultaneously contribute to all tau biomarkers.

GlycanAge was significantly lower in the active group compared to the inactive group (β = -7.437, p.adj = 7.85E-03), and nominally significant and increased in professional athletes compared to the active group (β = 7.546, p = 3.20E-02).

Similarly, leveraging a depression GWAS that includes up to 1,999,601 EUR individuals ( 26 ), depression showed only a nominally significant genetic correlation with GlycA ( r g = 0.138, SE = 0.064, p = .032), with an estimate that was about half of the one observed for PTSD.

RGS4 was significantly expressed in the coronary artery tissue according to GTEx data (median transcripts per million =18.23), although rs10799925, an intergenic lead variant, and RGS4 expression showed only nominally significant eQTL association (normalized effect size =−0.150; p =0.032).

When women with early menopause were added, breast cancer risk remained increased and ovarian cancer was also nominally significant (3.38 [1.15, 8.65]; p=0.032).

meta-analysis ( 29 ), only ARRDC3 passed a Bonferroni-corrected P value threshold ( P = 0.00035), while WSCD1 was nominally significant ( P = 0.032); one of the Falconnier et al. genes had been filtered out during quality control processing in Carter et al.

The association with previous VTE for one SD increase in CFHR5 level in VEBIOS Coagulation was still nominally significant when adjusting for C3 levels (OR 1.36 [CI 1.03-1.82], p = 0.032), although weaker compared to adjusting only for age and sex (OR 1.55 [CI 1.2-2.01], p = 8.85E-04, Table 3 and Supplementary data 1 [Tab_8] ).

11 We only found a nominally significant association of rs10191329 with the yearly change rate of the lateral ventricles ( p = 0.032), but not with any of the other 14 investigated metrics, including yearly change rates of the total brain volume ( p = 0.690), thalamus ( p = 0.953), or putamen ( p = 0.613).

Supplementary data thorax-2023-220856supp002.xlsx Causal estimate for seropositive RA on IPF The primary IVW-FE analysis gave a nominally significant result for a protective causal effect of seropositive RA on IPF (OR 0.93; 95% CI 0.87 to 0.99; p=0.032) ( figure 2A and online supplemental table 6A ).

Moreover, we found nominally significant effects (uncorrected) of PAE for FA in the ICP-R (p = 0.033) and SS-L (p = 0.021).

The set of 37 monogenic obesity genes showed a weaker but also nominally significant enrichment (2.05-fold enrichment, P = 0.034).

The sole exception was Bacillus subtilis strain 3610, for which the interaction between time post-infection and maternal condition was weakly nominally significant ( S2 Table ; p = 0.034).

A nominally significant (p=0.034) improvement was observed in global alpha AEC-c.

SLE status was significantly associated with reduced XCI-skew in 40–49 years (p=9.4×10 −4 ) and 50–59 years (p=9.8×10 −4 ), after Bonferroni correction (alpha=0.0125), and nominally significant in the over 60 years group (p=0.034; online supplemental figure S1 ).

Among the 14 items assessed, only the frequency of consuming Mediterranean-style sautéed dishes showed a nominally significant difference between the sexes ( p = 0.035).

At 1000 kHz, aged animals exhibited nominally significantly increased resistance (217.5 ± 20.5 versus 151.6 ± 12.9 ohms; p = 0.035, not FDR significant), while phase angle and reactance did not change as compared to young animals (Fig. 3 J–L).

Cross‐fostering had a nominally significant effect on the DNA methylation pattern for Pde4d (Fline: F 1,37 = 4.81; p = 0.035) but significantly interacted with genetic line (Line × Fline: F 1,37 = 9.22; p = 0.004; Figure 1A ).

The difference in the proportions of patients with ≥1 TEAE (10.3%; 95% confidence interval, −0.3% to −21.0%) was nominally significant ( P = .0355).

Furthermore, a positive correlation between the 5-year mean IGF-1 SDS and the duration of GHRT was nominally significant (r = 0.421, p = 0.036).

A nominally significant association with bleeding risk persisted only for rosuvastatin (OR = 2.189; 95% CI: 1.039–4.612; p = 0.037), but this finding should be interpreted with caution and regarded as exploratory. 3.4.

A nominally significant interaction effect was observed in patients with hypertension ( P = 0.037) and in those with wide QRS ( P = 0.003) ( Table 6 ).

An initial synthesis of the volume data from the left and right habenula using a paired samples t ‐test also supported this point: no significant interhemispheric differences for either the healthy samples ( t (24) = 1.443, p = .162, Cohen d = 0.289), or the patients with SCZ ( t (4) = −0.550, p = .612, d = −0.246); there appeared to be a nominally significant difference in MDD subgroup ( t (10) = 2.403, p = .037, d = 0.725), but it did not survive correction of multiple testing.

Similarly, the conditional multivariable MR association of IL-6 on AN is only nominally significant (OR = 0.96, [95% CI = 0.93–0.99], P = 0.037).