“borderline significant”

Higher sitting time at work showed a borderline significant association (p=0.055) with higher overall pain intensity, as indicated by the main effect of sitting on pain in the fully adjusted model, but this trend was not present in the crude model or when adjustments for individual factors were made (model 2).

Obesity had a borderline significant association with poor SRH in model 2 only (OR = 1.33; p = 0.055).

However, in this beetle, the only difference found in the contrast tests corresponds to 70% ethanol (t = 6.64, df = 596, p < 0.001), although it is important to note that Bs was borderline significant (t = 3.00, df = 596, p = 0.055). 3.2.

Of the chemokine receptors tested, only CCR6 showed borderline significant correlation with CCL18 (p = 0.055); its expression was highly correlated with T-cell presence.

Similarly, RA patients in the active counselling group showed a borderline significant decline in DAS28 (β = −0.6 (−1.3 to 0), p = 0.055), while this trend was not significant in the control group (β = −0.4 (−0.9 to 0.14), p = 0.17).

In boys this association was significant and in girls the association was borderline significant ( p = 0.055).

There was a borderline significant association between disease stage and ts-49 ( p = 0.055). 5P_tRNA-Leu-CAA-4-1 was not differentially expressed between any groups of the clinical variables. 2.4.

In contrast, the relationship between parent-rated emotionality for happiness and pupil dilation to happy faces was only borderline significant after removing these participants, χ 2 = 3.69, p = .055, b = 0.10, SE = 0.051.

Lastly, our results were similar when we ran a sensitivity analysis setting the date of the last completed valid 24-h dietary assessment as the time of study entry (Additional file 1 : Table S11), with the exception of pre-menopausal breast cancers when analysing the score as a continuous variable which became borderline significant ( p = 0.055).

Correlation between work experience and mean practice scores was positive and borderline significant (r: 0.096; P < 0.055).

The funnel plot revealed some asymmetry with a borderline significant Egger's test ( P = 0.055; Supplemental Figure 8).

When symbolic responses from the two Single conditions were summed and compared to these responses from the two Multiple conditions, a paired t -test revealed a borderline significant difference, t (15) = 2.1, p = 0.055, d = 0.42 (Multiple > Single).

Publication bias Assessment of publication bias in the comparison of observation versus adjuvant treatment involved visual inspection of the funnel plot, which indicated asymmetry ( Figure 6 ), and Egger’s regression test, which showed a borderline significant result ( t = 2.38, P = 0.055).

A borderline significant association was identified between OH-MiNP metabolite levels and genital development in male participants ( p = 0.055).

The effect of omega-3 fatty acids supplementation on morning cortisol concentrations over the intervention period (week 0, 6, 12) was only borderline significant ( p = 0.055) with no change for midday cortisol levels ( p = 0.168) as evaluated by performing the Friedman test.

The Patient Expectation Index showed a borderline significant correlation with the IFDFW-6 ( r = 0.086, P = 0.055).

There was a borderline significant interaction of APOE ε4 and LDL-C (coefficient estimate = −0.34, P = 0.055) on cognitive dysfunction ( Supplementary Table 3 ).

There was no significant deterioration in fit when A was dropped from the ADE model (p = 0.740, AIC −1.890) whereas reducing an ACE to a CE model resulted in a borderline significant deterioration in fit (p = 0.055, AIC 1.669).

A borderline significant association was noted with overall emotional intelligence ( p = 0.055).

Micro-CT Analysis There is a borderline significant difference between the groups (CP-Ti and Ti6Al4V-ELI) over time with a mean difference over time of 5.58 (CI −0.15–11.3, p = 0.055) for BVi, and no significant difference for BVo with a mean difference over time of 3.54 (CI −5.18–12.3, p = 0.399).

This difference was less evident in the pooled analysis of the Clavien–Dindo > 2 for which p value was borderline significant ( p = 0.055).

There was a borderline significant difference by gender ( p = .055) ( Table 2 ).

There was a borderline significant association between app use and decreased incidence of low birth weight ( p = 0.055).

Institutionalization showed a borderline significant negative association with anxiety (ß = −0.10; p = 0.055), while male gender was positively associated with anxiety (ß = 0.10; p = 0.013).

This difference is borderline significant (P=0.055).