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 = 0.05711.1× alphagold
Deamidation was the next most abundant PTM and showed differences based on both age and solubility, with YWS versus OWS, OWS versus OWI, and YWI versus OWI comparisons all being significant ( P < 0.05) and the YWS versus YWI comparison being borderline significant ( P = 0.0571; see Fig. 2 B).
borderline significantp = 0.05721.1× alphagold
However, adjusted OR estimates for both methods are nearly all >1 and we observed, for the online questionnaire, associations close to the borderline significant threshold (in bold) for scented HDCPs ( p = 0.0572), irritants ( p = 0.0679) and sprays ( p = 0.0924).
borderline significantp=0.05721.1× alphagold
Among the different diversity indices calculated to estimate the TCR repertoire clonality ( online supplemental table S1 ), only the Berger-Parker Index gave a borderline significant difference in blood (p=0.0572) ( online supplemental table S2 ), with the CART-gp75/STING-L group showing the highest value (increase in dominance) ( figure 4D ).
borderline significantP = 0.05741.1× alphagold
Although a significant negative correlation was observed between IP-10 plasma levels and circulating CD4 T cells at M2 (rho = −0.49, P = 0.0282); such association was positive and borderline significant between plasma IP-10 levels and CXCR3 + CD4 T cell frequencies (rho = 0.43, P = 0.0574), and no association was observed between plasma IP-10 and the frequency of Th1Th17 CD4 T cells.
borderline significantP =0.0581.2× alphagold
The difference remained statistically significant after adjusting for all Table 1 sample characteristic variables except depression severity (difference in means of 0.10; 95% CI, 0.01–0.19; P =0.039), but was only borderline significant after adjusting for depression severity (difference in means of 0.10; 95% CI, 0.0–0.19; P =0.058).
borderline significantP value = 0.0581.2× alphagold
This association was borderline significant in the Czech population, (OR = 1.28, 95% CI 0.99–1.67; P value = 0.058) and statistically significant in the German population (OR = 1.36, 95% CI 1.06–1.75; P value = 0.016) and in the joint analysis (OR = 1.34, 95% CI 1.12–1.61; P value = 0.001).
borderline significantp = 0.0581.2× alphagold
In the multiple mediation model, significant total effect (direct path + indirect path via 3 mediators) ( b = 0.07, p < 0.001) and borderline significant direct effect (direct path) ( b = 0.03, p = 0.058) on scores of psychotic experiences were found for bullying quantity after adjustment for age, gender, and education levels.
borderline significantp = 0.0581.2× alphagold
Combining with numerical findings, we confirmed V5 – V35 were significantly predictive for RILI (p < 0.05), AUCs ranged from 0.729 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.541 – 0.918, p = 0.026) to 0.902 (95% CI 0.813 – 0.992, p = 0.001), furthermore, V40 was observed a borderline significant predictor with a predictive ability of 0.695 (95% CI 0.488 – 0.902, p = 0.058).
borderline significantP =0.0581.2× alphagold
When comparing the age- and gender-adjusted proportions of deficient patients in the pharmaceutical groups (regardless of supplementation), results showed that it was less common to be deficient among patients with corticosteroids (C) than among patients prescribed other medications (O) ( P =0.035) and borderline significant ( P =0.058) compared to patients with antiepileptic drugs (A).