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 =.0631.3× alphagold
Factors associated with Rubella seropositivity among infants with features suggestive of CRS On univariate analysis the factor associated significantly with Rubella seropositivity was being neonate (OR 2.3; 95% CI, 1.2 to 4.3; P =.012), whereas history of abortion in a mother had borderline significant association (OR 2.5; 95%CI, 0.9 to 6.5; P =.063.
borderline significantp = .0631.3× alphagold
Participants from the individualized intervention reported a borderline significant reduction in percentage energy from fat at 6 months ( p = .063) and a significant reduction at 12 months ( p < .05) and the group reported significantly more minutes of moderate physical activity than did controls at 6 and 12 months ( p < .05).
borderline significantP-value = 0.0631.3× alphagold
In the Dutch study group, but not in the Texan study group we found a significant association between the risk of having an NTD and DNA methylation levels of MTHFR (absolute decrease in methylation of −0.33% in cases, P-value = 0.001), and LEKR/CCNL (absolute increase in methylation: 1.36% in cases, P-value = 0.048), and a borderline significant association for VANGL (absolute increase in methylation: 0.17% in cases, P-value = 0.063).
borderline significantP = 0.0631.3× alphagold
The median OS in the group with a pre-treatment tumor diameter < 10.25 cm was 20.3 months (95% CI: 15.331–25.269), while it was 18.2 months (95% CI: 8.204–28.196) in the group with a tumor diameter ≥ 10.25 cm, indicating a borderline significant difference ( P = 0.063).
borderline significantP = 0.0631.3× alphagold
LVM/BMI increased ( P < 0.01) in the HTDD+ group versus the control and in a borderline significant manner ( P = 0.063) in the HTDD+ group versus the HTDD− group (see Table 2 ) [these LAV and LVM results will be published in another article written from this multipurpose study: ( J Hypertens accepted for publication, 2014)]. 3.5.
borderline significantP = 0.0631.3× alphagold
Regardless, in the current study we did not find that obesity modified gender disparities in likelihood of transplant referral, though this interaction was borderline significant ( P = 0.063) and some other evidence suggests that obese women are less likely to be waitlisted as compared with obese men. 10 An important future direction of our work will be to evaluate obesity and gender interactions across the spectrum of transplant steps.