Barely Significant
← all phrases

“borderline significant”

11,410 sentences · 11,410 papers · 14,072 search hits before verification · confirmed specimen

Sighted at

p=0.09

Listed by Hankins (2013) · Otte et al. (2022)

In the literature

borderline significantP = 0.0561.1× alphagold
A borderline significant interaction between H. pylori cagA status and genotypes at rs2294008 was observed for the combined group of subjects with IM or dysplasia (p = P = 0.056), in which the association appeared stronger in the cagA -positive group (OR = 1.80, 95% CI 1.29–2.42) than the cagA -negative group (OR = 1.03; 95% CI 0.63–1.68).
borderline significantP = .0561.1× alphagold
After adjustment for socio-demographic measures and number of FQHCs, every 5/100,000 increase in the PCP supply in 2011 was borderline significant (OR = 1.026, 95% CI = 0.999-1.054, P = .056) associated with the odds of being in the most favorable or the middle trajectory category group, and every 1/100,000 increase in the PCP supply change from 2011 to 2019 was significantly associated with 1.0% increase in odds of being in the most favorable trajectory category group (OR = 1.010, 95% CI = 1.001-1.019, P = .023).
borderline significantP =0.0561.1× alphagold
In all three cases, there was an increase in protein expression in the adult PCP treated rats compared with the control group, despite the effect on TROY protein expression only being a minor increase of 7% ( P =0.011; Figure 2 ), and the effect on Myt1 protein expression only equating to a borderline significant increase of 14.5% ( P =0.056; Figure 2 ).
borderline significantP = 0.0561.1× alphagold
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).
borderline significantp = 0.0561.1× alphagold
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 ).