“nominally significant”

When tested individually, both di- and tetranucleotides showed at least nominally significant signals (two-sided z -proportion test P = 0.038 and P = 3.7 × 10 –38 , respectively), but trinucleotides did not ( P = 0.95).

Additional sensitivity analyses showed that the cML-MA-BIC-DP method (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.53–0.69, p = 3.85 × 10 −11 ) yielded a similar result to IVW and weighted median methods ( Table 5 ), while the association from MR-APSS method was nominally significant (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.05–0.92, p = 0.038) ( Table 5 ; Supplementary Figure S2 ).

The difference in lymph node reduction between groups had nominally significant association in this exploratory analysis (p = 0.039, independent-samples t -test), with a moderate-to-large effect size (Cohen’s d = 0.71) ( Figure 2 ).

Assessment for significance of an SOD2 (# Ala16 alleles)-by-deployment interaction term (adjusted for both components of the interaction) to evaluate for effect modification by deployment was nominally significant, p = 0.039.

We further note that rs73404538 is nominally significant in the Sierra Leone susceptibility GWAS ( P = 0.039, OR = 0.71) and in a meta-analysis of the Nigeria and Sierra Leone susceptibility GWASs ( P = 0.021) with a concordant direction of effect (Extended Data Table 4 ).

0.25), corresponding to a nominally significant association (OR = 1.68; 95% CI: 1.05–2.67; p = 0.039).

Nominally significant positive associations were observed between the weighted PGS and maternal alcohol consumption at week 30 (ST17; beta = 0.067, se = 0.032, p = 0.039).

Progression-free survival (PFS) was also significant ( p = 6.730 × 10 −3 ; q = 0.0143), disease-specific survival (DSS) was nominally significant but borderline after FDR correction ( p = 0.0399; q = 0.0532), and disease-free survival (DFS) was not significant ( p = 0.0903; q = 0.0903) ( Figure 4 , Table S3 ).

When analyzing the time to gastrostomy based on the initial randomization group, the survival curves differed ( Figure 3 ) and Cox regression indicated a nominally significant difference (Likelihood Ratio Test, p = 0.040).

We did not find a significant association between severity of endometriosis and self-reported coeliac disease, neither did we find an association with self-reported lactose intolerance. The endometriosis PGS was not associated with defaecation pattern regularity ( P FDR = 1.00), though it did associate (nominally significant) with some of the gastrointestinal symptoms, i.e. abdominal pain (OR = 1.22, 95% CI = 1.01–1.47, p = 0.04, P FDR = 0.55) and pain during food intake (OR = 2.60, 95% CI = 1.28–5.29, p = 0.01, P FDR = 0.09).

ANN NEUROL 2025;98:1027–1043 Although WMH volume showed a nominally significant association with hippocampal volume ( p = 0.04) in the P‐tau181‐based BM‐CTL group, this did not remain significant after correction for multiple comparisons.

In exploratory subgroup analyses, ulcerative ileocolitis showed a nominally significant genetic association with perianal disease ( p = 0.04).

8 In the multivariable Cox model reported by Ruhwedel et al., the overall effect of primary tumor location was not statistically significant ( p = .11), but there was a nominally significant association for shorter OS in patients with pancreatic versus gastrointestinal NETs during [ 177 Lu]Lu‐edotreotide therapy ( p = .04). 33 However, there are prognostic differences between NETs of different origin, depending on the aggressiveness of disease. 44 , 45 Overall, our findin

When examining all subjects, nominally significant associations between carrier-status and remission (p = 0.04) and PSS-14 scores (p = 0.04) were observed after correcting for treatment arm.

Longitudinal change in total recall performance was nominally significant ( p = 0.04) between the PiB + and PiB − groups, and total recall at baseline was also significantly different between groups ( p < 0.01) indicating, as expected, a more overt cognitive decline was present in the individuals with positive PiB scans.

Among the more common ( n ≥ 5) movement disorders, only a higher proportion of dyskinesia in antipsychotic‐naïve individuals was nominally significant (antipsychotic‐naïve vs. ever‐exposed, 4/9 (44%) vs. 2/22 (9%), p = 0.04) (Table 4 ).

In the Phase 2 HART trial, the 45 mg bid (twice daily) dose showed a nominally significant benefit to TMS vs. placebo (Δ = −2.8, p = 0.04), particularly in hand movements (Δ = −0.93, p = 0.02) and gait and balance (Δ = −0.48, p = 0.04) [ 150 ].

MiR‐223‐3p showed a significant AUEC over 0.67 days for IFNβ‐1a when the miRNA returned to baseline ( p = 0.015), and a nominally significant AUEC for pegIFNβ‐1a over 13 days ( p = 0.04).

For example, in LiAc, GxE was seen for all reporters in that BY showed no significant change in UPS activity compared with SC for any reporter, while RM showed at least nominally significant reductions for all reporters ( t -test for effect of environment per strain, P ≤ 0.04).

That being said, there was a nominally significant association (OR = 1.26, p -value = 0.04) of the PRS-CRP constructed using a limited number of genome-wide significant SNPs, mimicking the one used by Huang et al. 8 , with moderate-to-severe OSA with EDS, compared with no OSA.

The direction of effect was consistent with that in the other studies but was only nominally significant in SDRNT1BIO ( P = 0.04) and not significant in DCCT ( P = 0.14) and WESDR ( P = 0.08).

The ABC showed a nominally significant reduction in the hyperactivity subscale, but only at week 2 ( p = 0.04) and lethargy at week 4 ( p = 0.04), although large effect sizes were again seen in the majority of the ABC subscales at some time points ( Table 4 ).

A post hoc analysis checking for sex interactions across the factors revealed a nominally significant interaction with sex for cardiometabolic MR1 only (GHQ-12 beta = −0.075, p = 0.040, SF12-MCS beta = −0.075, p = 0.042, reference category female).

Regarding neural correlates, only the left temporal pole and anterior parahippocampal gyrus activation during failed inhibition—go contrast was nominally significantly ( p = 0.04) associated with symptoms of hyperactivity-impulsivity, so there was only one mediation model involving neural correlates and therefore no additional multiple testing correction could be applied here (see also under Methods).

In the sensitivity analysis accounting for medication use, those who switched medications (mixed use) had 1.81 greater odds of experiencing high negative symptoms compared to those with continued AAP use; however, this was nominally significant ( p = 0.04).