“nominally significant”

If the result of the MR analysis was nominally significant ( P < 0.05), we inferred that there might be a causal relationship between the gut microbiota and the outcome 26 .

All these effects survived Bonferroni correction – additional, nominally significant results ( p < 0.05 threshold) are flagged in Table 3 .

In the entire cohort, the only nominally significant correlation was an inverse relationship between plasma C4-ana and predicted C4B expression ( ρ = −0.37, p = 0.05).

Of these, 10 had significantly different effect sizes ( p -value < 7.8 × 10 −4 , Bonferroni correction for 64 variants) and 22 were nominally significant ( p -value < 0.05).

Nominally significant results ( p < 0.05, FDR ≥ 0.05) were described as “suggestive associations”. 2.5.

These shared candidate metabolites were defined as metabolites showing nominally significant GSMR-prioritized associations ( p < 0.05) with at least one AF-related trait and at least one EY-related trait within the same tissue, together with opposite estimated association directions between the two trait classes.

We observed nominally significant ( P < 0.05) miRNA–target gene enrichment signal in three traits for five GWASs; height, RA and type 2 diabetes (Figure 2A ), which was consistent and robust with our previous results despite of the update on miRNA–target gene prediction algorithms ( 13 ).

In a per-protein analysis, replacing values below the limit of detection with protein specific LOD-values, five proteins (CSF-1, NTRK3, ICOSLG, SCF and PECAM-1) were found to have nominally significant differences between the two time-points (p < 0.05, Wilcox test).

Fourteen MGSs were nominally significant for the broad spectrum (Wilcoxon signed-rank test, unadjusted p < 0.05).

Only a nominally significant (p < 0.05) association was found with another ADPKD-related gene, PKD2 ( Supplemental Table 3 ).

For an additional 12 traits, we found nominally significant associations ( P < 0.05) with genetically determined LTL, with most of these traits showing significant and concordant associations with usual LTL (Fig. 4 and Supplementary Table 10 ).

Nominally significant P‐ values ( P < 0.05) from differential abundance were used as threshold for input lists for pathway discovery tools.

To ensure replication, it was furthermore a criterion that each metabolite was nominally significant ( P < 0.05) in both cohorts.

While none of the GO terms from the trio univariate GSEA met the FDR significance threshold, nominally significant (p < 0.05) pathways suggest some overlap with Cohort 1 results, including neuron recognition , cerebral cortex cell migration and axonal fasciculation and GO terms related to.

Variable Selection Based on linear mixed models including the factors of time, age at enrollment, sex, and stimulus version, 23 speech variables from the picture description task showed nominally significant ( P < 0.05) effects of time at the group level.

Studies) below Metabolome Wide Significance Level (MWASL) threshold (p = 2.4 * 10E–9 to 1.1 * 10E–5) with Ln[CACs + 1] mannose, alanine and acetaminophen-glucuronide strongly associated yet glutamate and histidine had strong inverse associations besides other significant metabolites also remained nominally significant (p < 0.05) but by 50% weaker association; furthermore, lipoprotein subcategories of total plasma cholesterol, total plasma apolipoprotein B and apolipoprotein B within total plasma LDL significantly associated with Ln[CACs + 1] in model-3 (further adjusted for model-1 + nonlipid CVD risk factors of SBP, DM, Smoking status, and use of medication for hypercholesterolemia, BP or DM).”.

In addition, 26 dSVs and 51 vSVs showed nominally significant heritability ( P < 0.05), with an average h 2 of 0.28 and 0.41, respectively (Supplementary Tables 4 and 5 ).

So it should be kept in mind that each individual p value has a one-in-twenty chance of being nominally significant (p < 0.05) purely from random fluctuations.

We note that although APOE has previously been identified as a AD TWAS gene in microglia 83 , we did not highlight it in our scTWAS results because it did not pass Stage 1 screening, despite nominally significant Stage 2 associations in proliferate, surveilling, and reacting microglia (nominal p -values < 0.05).

Differential methylation analysis identified 6095 nominally significant differentially methylated CpG sites (DMCs; p < 0.05, log fold-change > 0.1), associated with 2935 unique genes.

The analysis, focusing on nominally significant hits ( p < 0.05, >1.5-liner fold change) and the Reactome and KEGG pathway databases [via WebGestalt ( Subramanian et al., 2005 ; Liao et al., 2019 )], failed to detect FDR significant enrichment.

A FDR-adjusted P value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant; unadjusted P value < 0.05 was considered nominally significant and unadjusted P value = 0.05 was considered borderline significant.

Of those, 38,776 (95%) showed the same direction of effect, 33,128 (81%) also had a nominally significant p value ( p < 0.05), and 25,544 (63%) had an FDR-adjusted p < 0.05 in the BLUEPRINT data (Fig. 1b , Supplementary Data 1 ).

A nominally significant association was observed between survival and the DPP4 enzymatic activity at day 1 (p<0.05), with a higher DPP4 activity being associated with an increase in survival.

Although 75 proteins showed nominally significant abundance differences ( p ≤ 0.05), all corresponding q‐values were 0.99, indicating no statistically robust differences in abundance between PEA and VC at 36 h.