“nominally significant”

We found that 18 of the 108 proteins investigated were influenced by storage time (Supplementary Table 1, nominally significant, p < 0.05), and one protein (Cancer antigen 125; CA-125 also known as Mucin 16) remained statistically significant after correction for testing of multiple hypotheses (Bonferroni, p < 0.05/108 = 4.6 × 10 − 4 ).

Only the sociability and rs-fMRI trait pairs showing at least nominally significant ( p < 0.05) global, bivariate genetic correlations were further explored at the local genomic level.

However, within specific strata, exploratory observations showed nominally significant negative correlations ( P < 0.05) in participants with/without health insurance, among Other Hispanic individuals, and in those with low neutrophil counts, low SII/AISI scores, or pre-frailty/frailty status, both before and after adjusting for age, household education, and PIR (Table S4).

We found that four SNPs showed nominally significant associations at P <0.05 for rs26232 ( C5orf30 ), rs2073838 ( SLC22A4 ), rs11676922 ( AFF3 ), and rs7528684 ( FCRL3 ).

Instrumental Variable Analysis We identified at least nominally significant ( p <0.05) causal estimates for the effect of BMI (IV estimators) on ever and incident heart failure, ever hypertension, ever and incident T2D, ever dyslipidemia, and ever metabolic syndrome ( Table 2 ).

Ninety-four proteins were nominally significant ( p < 0.05), yet none survived FDR-correction.

Nine (35%) reported nominally significant summary results at P < 0.05 (2 had P < 0.001).

Differential gene expression analyses of CD11b + cells in VAT and SAT from individuals with obesity revealed nominally significant differences in the gene expression profile (FDR p < 0.05, absolute fold change > 1.5; Figure 1A,B ).

Gene set enrichment analyses Enrichment analyses of Gene Ontology (GO) terms [ 45 ] and Reactome pathways [ 46 ] were performed in g:Profiler [ 47 ] with nominally significant ( p < 0.05) genes derived from the cross-ancestry, gene-based meta-analysis.

If the MR analysis results were nominally significant ( P < 0.05), we considered that there might be a causal relationship between the intestinal flora and the lipids.

While the association was still nominally significant ( p < 0.05), it was no longer significant with the Benjamini–Hochberg procedure.

This concordance persisted at the final infusion visit (Spearman’s ρ : 0.46, q < 0.05), with additional nominally significant concordance (p < 0.05, q > 0.05) for CDCA (Spearman’s ρ : 0.27) and HCA (Spearman’s ρ : 0.26) at that visit.

Although there was a nominally significant main effect of instruction, t (25.96) = 2.09, p = .05, there were no significant interactions involving instructions.

Of the 21 loci, 13 were nominally significant (p<0.05) in UKBB, including one variant (rs4388642 in CFH, p=1.82×10 -17 ) reaching Bonferroni-corrected significance (Supplementary file Table S3).

Of the nominally significant single‐cell SMR associations ( P <0.05), >75% (Figure 2E ) were not detected in the corresponding GTEx brain tissue SMR analyses.

When using cutoff value 0.05 to separate the genes into three gene sets (i.e., nominally significant genes were defined as those with gene-wise P value < 0.05), we found that the DEPgenes in the subnetwork had a significantly larger proportion of nominally significant genes in the GWAS dataset (Fisher's exact test, P = 4.13 × 10 -4 ) compared to the remaining genes.

A nominally significant estimate was defined as p < 0.05 but q ≥ 0.05.

In total, 28 genes in the European-American sample and ten genes in the African-American sample were nominally significant (i.e., the observed test statistic differed from neutral expectations at p < 0.05) in one or more tests of the allele frequency distribution ( Figure 1 ).

Clusters with nominally significant correlations ( p < 0.05; FDR corrected) were further analyzed with hierarchical regression models for descriptive analyses.

Resulting group-level oscillations were nominally significant (G-cosinor p < 0.05) in 5.9% to 85.8% of ROIs across seven of the nine MRI metrics (Supplementary Table 4 ).

Nominally significant three-way interaction terms ( p < 0.05) were identified for s-methylcysteine, alpha-aminobutyric acid, and asparagine.

For this purpose, we extracted information on CpGs from each study that met methylome-wide significance as defined by that study’s criterion (e.g., Bonferroni, false discovery rate or FDR) or were nominally significant (p < 0.05).

Each of the independent variables in the regression models was nominally significant, with p < 0.05.

In females, we found a significantly higher proportion of CpGs showing increased variability with age among nominally significant ( p < 0.05) CpGs under inactivation, but not among CpGs escaping inactivation.

Causal effects were considered nominally significant (suggestive) when the IVW p < 0.05 and sensitivity analyses revealed no contradictory findings.