“borderline significant”

Women had slightly more meningiomas, but because of small numbers, the difference was only borderline significant (1.0 vs. 0.4%, p = 0.056).

High S100A monocyte gene expression was associated with elevated plasma levels of protein S100A8, while the elevation of protein S100A9 was borderline significant ( p = 0.056) ( Figure 6 ).

Tumor size was borderline significant ( p = 0.056), and patients with early stage tumors tended to have a longer time to progression.

Associations with inflammation detected by US across all time points The univariate analyses showed significant associations between GLOESS and patient-reported flare ( p = 0.01), SJC28 ( p = 0.01), and CRP (borderline significant p = 0.056), while independent associations were only observed for SJC28 ( p = 0.009) (Table 4 ).

For example, having more than one job showed a significant association with an increased odds of work-related injury in males (AOR, 1.62; CI, 1.07–2.46; p = 0.023); this association was only borderline significant in females (AOR, 1.87; CI, 0.98–3.56; p = 0.056).

There was a borderline significant difference between two groups in 3-year RFS (p = 0.056, log-rank test) ( Fig 3A ). 3-year peritoneal RFS rate was 83% in CY0 and stamp+ cases (n = 6), and 0% in CY1 and stamp + /- cases (n = 7).

Patients with JIP1 negative tumours showed a better survival outcome (mean 12.0 years) compared to patients with JIP1 positive tumours (mean 9.1 years); this difference in overall survival is borderline significant (LogRank, p = 0.056).

High POSTN expression alone showed a borderline significant correlation with unfavorable PFS (log-rank p=0.056).

Kaplan–Meier analysis showed significantly poorer survival ( p < 0.001) in dogs with a high Ki67 PI (≥ 18%), whereas the composite score showed a borderline significant association with outcome in Cox regression ( p = 0.056; hazard ratio 2.80).

24.27 kg/m 2 , p = 0.056, borderline significant) and higher triglycerides (1. 56 vs. 1. 23 mmol/L, p = 0.055, borderline significant), and the AHI and ODI were more severe, the mean SPO2 and LSPO2 were lower, and the proportion of T90 was greater (all p < 0.01).

Regarding age, the RAM cohort was younger than the RCG cohort: RAM as compared to the RCG in all age categories ( p -value <0.05) except the age category 65–80, where the difference was borderline significant ( p -value = 0.056).

However, for one of the measures, the reciprocal mean reaction time (mean 1/RT), the difference was borderline significant ( P = 0.056), indicating a slight improvement in performance after the fourth night shift compared with after the third.

When absolute CD8 count was replaced by changes in CD8 from pre-cART values (Table 3 [ii]), the increase in CD8 was borderline significant in the univariate model (HR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.00–1.40; P = 0.056), but was not associated with VF in the adjusted model (HR = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.84–1.22; P = 0.909). 4.

This proportion significantly increased over time (2008: 3.7%, 2012: 6.8%, p=0.014) and was higher among those of non-Dutch ethnicity, although borderline significant (Dutch: 4.4%, non-Dutch: 6.9%, p=0.056).

We find the effect is borderline significant ( p = 0.056).

P1NP levels showed a borderline significant decrease in the LC diet group ( p = 0.056) and remained largely unchanged in the MED diet group ( p = 0.594).

Joint associations of RC and hs-CRP with risk of coronary heart disease When using the cut-points of 1.00 mmol/L for RC and 2.00 mg/L for hs-CRP to define elevated RC and hs-CRP, their interactions were borderline significant for CHD ( P = 0.056) and significant for MI ( P = 0.007).

A borderline significant difference between the groups was found in one of the MFI‐20 subscales where participants in the training group rated more reduced activity (13.1 vs. 11.8, p = .056).

A decreasing trend among patients with HLHS was borderline significant (19/49 vs 6/32; p=0.056).

A borderline significant difference in BCVA changes remained consistent between the two subgroups at Month 12 ( P = 0.056).

In amyloid positive MCI compared to amyloid negative controls, there were significantly smaller volumes in ERC, anterior and posterior hippocampus (all p < 0.01), while BA35 were borderline significant smaller ( p = 0.056).

A borderline significant correlation ( r = 0.62, p = 0.056) was detected between LI before intervention and preintervention performance on the CHEQ and at post intervention this correlation was significant ( r = 0.686, p = 0.041) (see Figure 4 ).

Teeth/oral symptoms and comorbidities The presence of a high or narrow palate ( P = 0.005), TMJ symptoms ( P < 0.0001) and brittle teeth ( P = 0.019) were all self-reported more often in patients with hEDS or HSD compared with controls, with overcrowding being borderline significant ( P = 0.056) ( Supplementary Table S5 , available at Rheumatology Advances in Practice online).

Moreover, a borderline significant interaction between intention and block ( F 2.2,61.7 = 2.96, p = .056, η p 2 = .09) was driven by significantly better performance with implementation intentions compared with goal intentions on the first block-set ( F 1,29 = 6.27, p = .02, η p 2 = .18)—an effect that was absent in the later training block-sets (all p > .16, F < 2.0).

Perception score showed a negative but borderline significant association (OR = 0.78; 95% CI = 0.61–1.01; p = 0.056), suggesting that participants with stronger risk perceptions had slightly lower odds of proper disposal practice, though this effect was not statistically significant.