“borderline significance”

Statistical significance was defined as p < 0.05 and borderline significance as p < 0.10.

Values with borderline significance ( p < 0.10) were subjected to multiple regression analyses with backward selection.

The decrease in miR-98 showed statistical borderline significance (0.05 ≤ p ≤ 0.1).

During the two seasons above, we noted an age-group related asynchrony in the RSV detection rate; the RSV detection rate in young children remained similar (or even increased with borderline significance; 43/594, 7.24%, and 42/556, 7.55% vs 292/5293, 5.52%; P = 0.10 and P = 0.06, respectively) compared with the pre-pandemic seasons whereas the detection rate in older adults decreased significantly (8/1779, 0.45%, and 3/2021, 0.15% vs 160/10,348, 1.55%; P < 0.001 in two comparisons).

The model with the variables that met the criteria of minimal borderline significance ( P < .1) was considered to be the best adjusted model.

Borderline significance as indicator of a trend was considered for 0.05<p<0.10.

Cells with strong XIAP KD differed from cells with moderate XIAP KD and sh‐CTRL regarding several GO‐terms on apoptosis signaling, although at borderline significance ( P < 0.1, Table EV2 ), pinpointing towards apoptosis as underlying mechanism for cell death by strong XIAP KD.

The differences we noted between the above-noted subgroups of patients, analyzed by univariate analysis, failed to achieve the a-priori threshold for statistical significance of P ≤ 0.05, or even the delineation line for borderline significance at P ≤ 0.10.

Variables that were significant or with borderline significance (p ≤ 0.1) were included into the multivariate model.

Significance was set at p < 0.05, and borderline significance at 0.05 < p < 0.10.

All tests were two‐sided with a level of significance set at p < 0.05, and borderline significance as 0.05 < p < 0.10.

Day 3: Statistically significant differences (or borderline significance, p < 0.1) were observed between male and female subgroups (with higher average values in men) and between age groups (with higher average values in younger patients).

Statistical significance was set at p<0.05, while borderline significance was considered for p-values <0.1.

The measurement results were interpreted as p < 0.001 as very high statistical significance, 0.001 ≤ p < 0.01 as high statistical significance, 0.01 ≤ p < 0.05 as statistically significant, 0.05 ≤ p < 0.10 as borderline significance, and p > 0.10 as no statistically significant difference. 3.

We further summarized the results of the correlation analysis, which showed statistical ( p < 0.05) and borderline significance ( p < 0.10), in Table 2 (Fig. 1 ).

In the case of salinity and muscle-weight, borderline significance was observed ( P < 0.10), while the rest of the fixed effect parameters showed P -values lower than 0.001 ( Table 5 ).

There was a trend of higher alpha diversities (number of species, Chao1 and Shannon index) for CRA + compared to CRA- with a borderline significance (0.05 < P < 0.1).

Adults with hypertension scored on average 2.32 points lower (95% CI: -4.84–0.21) on physical health QoL compared to the healthy group and this difference had borderline significance ( p < 0.10).

Significance level was set at p < 0.05, and borderline significance are reported where p < 0.1.

For RUNX2, an essential osteogenic transcription factor [ 45 ], we observed higher yet borderline significance levels (P < 0.1) at 5 days, especially for the Pi-treated monolayer culture and spheroids in basic medium and OM ( Fig. 6 A).

Borderline significance was observed between LV fat and E/A (β = -0.24, p = 0.10) after the multivariable adjustment.

Variables reaching significance, or borderline significance, on univariate analysis ( p ≤ 0.1) were subsequently incorporated into a multivariate model.

Variables reaching significance, or borderline significance, on univariate analysis ( p < 0.1) were subsequently incorporated into a multivariate model.

The model included age ≥70 years, sex, and seven factors found to be of at least borderline significance ( P <0.10) in univariate analysis ( Table 1 ).

The multivariate analysis was adjusted to include clinically significant variables (age ≥ 65, gender, Shock index > 1, active bleeding, and endoscopic ligation) and variables with at least borderline significance ( P < 0.10) in univariate analysis.