Length of hospital stay showed a borderline significant trend favoring PPF (11.00 ± 6.99 vs. 16.27 ± 13.03 days, p = 0.05).
Excerpts
The total OAG-F scores of the survivors indicated a significant downward trend, whereas the scores demonstrated an increasing trend in non-survivors ( p < 0.05).
borderline significancep = 0.05
In the multivariate analysis, including all parameters with a p -value < 0.30 from the binary logistic regression, arterial hypertension showed a borderline significance (OR 0.24 (95% CI 0.06–0.99); p = 0.05), while coronary artery disease was identified as a significant predictor for non-sustained VT (OR 4.99 (95% CI 1.11–22.46); p = 0.04).
Tornetta reduction quality did not differ significantly across the four groups overall ( p = 0.139); however, the proportion of acceptable reductions was lower in Group 4 (74.1%) compared with Group 3 (96.3%), with a borderline significant difference (Fisher’s exact test, p = 0.050; Table 5 ).
showed a trendp = 0.05
Age showed a trend for significance with PC (OR 1.03, 95% CI 1–1.06, p = 0.05) ( Table 3 ). 4.
Survival Pre-HSCT weight, BMI, fat mass, RAPA-Aerobic activity score, Positive Affect, GCGQ score, and ASAS-Wellness all correlated with longer survival; however, these were nominally significant ( p < 0.05) and did not reach significance at our pre-determined level ( p < 0.01).
showed a trendp > 0.05
Although MP-CMML showed a trend toward inferior survival, pairwise comparisons between subtypes did not reach statistical significance (all p > 0.05). 3.3.2.
borderline significancep = 0.050
In CMML, ASXL1 and TET2 mutations were associated with a trend toward better prognosis compared with wild-type (HR 0.21, p = 0.052; HR 0.25, p = 0.057, respectively), while U2AF1 mutations were associated with adverse prognosis in univariate analysis with borderline significance (HR 12.20, p = 0.050).
This result was borderline significant ( p = 0.05), and therefore should be interpreted with caution, as it may reflect a trend rather than a definitive difference.
Two other criteria showed compliance improvements very close to statistical significance ( p = 0.05), i.e., the request for hemorrhage panels from the clinical laboratory, including fibrinogen measures, and the administration of blood derivatives to achieve an FFP:pRBC ratio ≥ 1:2.
a trend toward significancep = 0.095
IPI showed a trend toward significance at the overall level ( p = 0.095), whereas the high-intermediate/high-risk IPI category reached borderline significance in pairwise comparison (HR = 4.720, p = 0.050).
marginally non-significantp = 0.05
A meta-analysis of six randomized controlled trials investigating the efficacy of incorporating VR into PR for patients with COPD noted that VR enhanced the therapeutic effects of PR with significant improvements in FEV1 ( p < 0.05) and marginally non-significant improvements in 6MWT ( p = 0.05) [ 84 ].
Noteworthy, the highest logistic regression coefficients obtained in the CL group were for the questions on “reading”, “driving at night”, “working with PC” and “watching tv” ( Figure 1 B), all four questions being related to functionality (OSDI B) and being nearly significant for the classification as symptomatic, subject only to the score given to “reading” ( p = 0.05, t -test of conformity).
Under conservative Bonferroni correction (α = 0.0033), the NLR–dyspnea ( p = 0.001) and MUST–appetite loss ( p = 0.001) associations remained statistically significant; the NLR–physical functioning, NLR–role functioning, and MUST–nausea/vomiting associations were nominally significant ( p < 0.05) but did not survive Bonferroni correction and are reported as exploratory.
38), pre-SLS test-dominant (26.8% decrease in falls for 1 unit increase in pre-SLS test-dominant, p = 0.003), pre-SLS test-non-dominant (15.9% decrease in falls with 1 unit increase in pre-SLS test-non-dominant, p = 0.029), MMSE (10.9% decrease in falls with 1 unit increase in MMSE, p = 0.018), and marginally significant for pre-FRT (4.6% decrease in falls with 1 unit increase in pre-FRT, p = 0.050).
borderline significancep = 0.05
Additionally, women had a better OS than men, with borderline significance ( p = 0.05).
ADC presented a borderline significant discriminatory power (AUC 0.600, p = 0.05), with a significantly lower AUC compared with the SUVavg and short-axis diameter ( p < 0.01 and p = 0.03, n = 162). 3.5.
Results showed a higher survival rate for patients without vocal cord palsy, while those without IONM and with palsy had the worst survival rate, which approached marginal significance ( p = 0.05–0.1). 3.4.
Influences on vTUG Total Time Among the tested variables, the UPDRS III gait subscore, patient-reported motion status, shoe type, and chair used significantly improved the AIC, reducing it from 998.19 in the base model to 938.57 in the full model, and were highly significant in the likelihood ratio test (LRT) ( p < 0.05).
showed a trendp = 0.05
A meta-analysis performed on isoflurane only showed a trend ( p = 0.05) towards a reduction in mortality in a subgroup of high-quality studies comparing isoflurane to propofol in cardiac surgery [ 52 ].
Within-group analysis showed a borderline significant improvement in the sham group ( p = 0.05) and a trend toward improvement in the real tDCS group ( p = 0.06).
There was a significant decrease in cell numbers over 24 h when treated with 3 nM BPA in the presence of LY294002 ( p < 0.001; Figure 1 E), and just short of significance for the U0126 ( p = 0.05; Figure 1 E). 3.2.
The Cox regression with Firth’s penalized maximum likelihood analysis revealed that only MACE (χ 2 = 23.6; HR 9.49 (3.63–30.72); p < 0.001) was independently associated with increased risk of CVD death, whereas the effect of age did not reach statistical significance (χ 2 = 3.8; HR 1.02 (1.00–1.09); p = 0.05) ( Figure 3 ). 3.3.
While the age groups < 25 years, 30– < 35 years, and 35– < 40 years showed a positive trend in the linear regression model with time as an independent variable, none of the age groups showed statistical significance (all p -values > 0.05).
IVF Success Rates Despite a marginal trend towards significance ( p = 0.05), the implantation rate (17.3% vs. 23.6%) and the live birth rate per cycle (16.1% vs. 23.2%) were comparable between the endometriosis and the control groups.