“only marginally significant”

For the Pyrenees area, the trend showed an increase in urban and forest and a decrease in open and crops, but crops were the only marginally significant change ( p < 0.1).

As seen in Table 5 , pretest 2-back RT significantly predicted CI performance ( p < = 0.012), while this prediction was only marginally significant for L2 listening span (0.05 < p < 0.10).

However, this response was only significant for juvenile survival of the P-lines on tomato, all other responses were only marginally significant ( P < 0.1 in all cases, Table 1 ).

However, these intra-annual differences were only marginally significant (P<0.1).

Moreover, some of the marginal adherence difference estimates achieved significance at a p<0.05 level when the AOR was only marginally significant (ie, 0.05≤p≤0.10) and notably, Navy members had a significant 24.6% lower 90-day adherence relative to Army members when the AOR was non-significant with a p=0.103.

Although some differences in accumulation of both the total hydroxycinnamoyl-malate esters as well as the individual derivatives were only marginally significant ( P just under 0.05), trending (0.05 < P < 0.10), or not significant ( P > 0.10) by the Mann-Whitney analysis, as discussed above, this may be due to including all plants containing the transgenes of interest in the analysis.

However, these differences were only marginally significant ( p < 0.10) due to the high variance among plastics.

Results revealed only marginally significant ( p < 0.100) positive correlations between the differences in RMSSD, SDNN and PainLoad , i.e., higher pain thresholds in the HLC compared to the LLC were associated with a higher RMSSD [ r s = 0.189, p = 0.083, 95%CI(−0.025 0.377)] and SDNN [ r s = 0.187, p = 0.086, 95%CI(−0.018 0.393)] in the HLC relative to the LLC.

When these two groups were compared, the age effect on the adaptive shifts was only marginally significant, -41.8° vs. −22.5°, F (1,18) = 3.9, p <.1.

In the NFNSS, the odds of not experiencing hunger were higher among female respondents (OR: 1.93; 95% CI: 0.96–3.88), although this association was only marginally significant ( p < 0.1).

(2004) report significant differentiation ( P < 0.01) in microsatellite DNA within the Stikine, Nass, and Skeena rivers, but only marginally significant differentiation ( P < 0.10) among sea/river-type populations within the Alsek and Taku drainages.

Participants in the high-worry group selected the increasing option less often than expected by chance, although the difference was only marginally significant, t (27) = −1.95, p < 0.10.

The 3-way interaction between source, advice intuitiveness, and scenario risk level was only marginally significant ( P= .10), whereas the 2-way interaction between advice intuitiveness and scenario risk level was statistically significant ( P <.001), supporting hypothesis 2 ( Table 2 ).

In Danish respondents, having favourable health behaviours was linked negatively to attitudes toward the product, but this was only marginally significant at p < .10 (Table 4 ).

For Black women, the relative risk ratio is similar to other groups (RR = 1.078 95% CI: 0.992–1.172) but only marginally significant ( p < .10).

The MR of pedestrian death was 3.10/100 000 py (95% CI 1.33 to 4.86) for wheelchair users aged 30–49, which was approximately double the risk among the overall population of 30–49 year olds but only marginally significant (p=0.10).

Similar results were found in infants, but classification accuracy for generalizing across time-points was only marginally significant (2-D cluster p < 0.10).

F2-isoprostane concentrations were significantly negatively correlated with telomere length in the combined sample (F = 4.78, p<0.01, controlling for age and sex), but this relationship was only marginally significant in the separate depressed (F = 2.59, p<0.10) and control groups (F = 2.31, p = 0.13) due to low statistical power.

However, at 0.15–0.3-m depth the correlation with the sum of silt and clay content was only marginally significant (P = 0.1).

However, this difference was only marginally significant ( p < 0.10).

Educational attainment was only marginally significant in predicting self-efficacy (Model 1: B = 0.087, p < 0.10), with no significant influence on happiness (Model 2: B = 0.029, p = 0.621; Model 3: B = 0.024, p = 0.678).

However, the large standard error in 1990 makes the Wald test for the difference only marginally significant (p < .10) (Census Bureau privacy rules prevent disclosure of the actual coefficients).

For anxiety, pathway 1 was only marginally significant ( P< .10) while Pathway 2 was statistically significant ( P< .05).

The main effect of time was only marginally significant for accuracy [ F (1, 42) = 2.9, p = 0.1], which suggested only modest increases in task accuracy for all children from pre-test ( M = 91.3%, SE = 7.2%) to post-test ( M = 93.8%, SE = 0.8%).

However, this was only marginally significant ( P ≤ 0.1).