“borderline significant”

Also, a borderline significant larger proportion of patients had NT-proBNP < 3000 ng/L when diagnosed with ATTRwt in 2020–2022 as compared with those diagnosed in 2017–2019 (68% vs. 57%, p = .082, Figure 1(B) ).

For item 4 (“Consumes nuts regularly (at least 2–3 times per week)”), a borderline significant association was observed ( p = 0.082).

There were borderline significant ORs for the BC comparison for methylene chloride (OR = 1.41, 95 % CI = 0.96–2.07, p = 0.082) and PAHs (OR = 1.44, 95 % CI = 0.98–2.11, p = 0.064).

The analyses showed that a high Shannon diversity index was borderline significant after controlling for previous metastatic chemotherapy ( P = 0.082) or the number of metastatic sites ( P = 0.063). 3.4.

Underweight had a borderline significant association with DM compared with normal weight (OR = 1.30, p = 0.082).

CP SUVR was also independently prognostic for predicting future amyloid-positive conversion in the ADNI (HR 0.06 [0.01-0.25], P < 0.001 in the ADNI) and was borderline significant in the HABS (HR 0.03 [< 0.01—1.61], P = 0.082).

In analogy to SOCS2, IGF-I levels above the median were associated with significantly longer overall survival (76.3 versus 110.5 months; P = 0.01; Figure 1 ), and showed a borderline significant association to longer disease free survival (70.9 versus 96.1 months; P = 0.082).

The difference of AuROC between the two scoring systems was borderline significant (P = 0.082).

GM = 2.20 in the rest of the sample), however this finding was only borderline significant (p value = 0.082).

We also found borderline significant associations involving histological type, with PTC more common in younger patients and FTC more common in older cases ( P = 0.082, Table 1 ) and tumor size, with younger cases presenting more frequently with large tumors when compared to older patients (50.5% vs. 38.5%, P = 0.066, Table 1 ). 3.2.

At the 2-year follow-up, the association between possible sarcopenia and mortality in obese patients was borderline significant ( P = 0.0823, Figure S1 A), while possible sarcopenia was associated with increased mortality risk in all other subgroups.

Plaque carbamylation showed a borderline significant correlation with serum urea levels (r=0.45, p=0.083), whereas no correlation was observed with cardiovascular risk factors, including smoking.

All the P values but one were significant (i.e., all P value < 0.0045); one P value was borderline significant ( P value = 0.083); in most of the cases (all data sets for the first randomization, 5 of 6 data sets for the second randomization), the number of detected MEOMs in the randomized networks was zero or close to zero (see details in supplementary table 10, Supplementary Material online).

Although that, color match (CM) scores between groups showed a borderline significant difference from the first week of evaluation ( p -value = 0.083).

Independent predicators for inferior OS included un‐mutated IGHV (mutated IGHV : HR = 0·487, 95% CI: 0·262–0·907; P = 0·023), trisomy 12 (HR = 2·301, 95% CI: 1·150–3·951; P = 0·007), TP53 disruption (HR = 3·667, 95% CI: 2·025–6·639; P < 0·0001), SF3B1 mutations (HR = 2·786, 95% CI: 1·239–6·267; P = 0·013) and at a borderline significant level for BCR subset 8 (HR = 2·307, 95% CI: 0·896–5·938; P = 0·083) (Table 3 ).

The interaction term for noise and region was borderline significant ( p = 0.083), the interaction term for PM 2.5 and region was not significant ( p = 0.412).

Time-to-event analysis indicated a borderline significant effects of genotype (p=0.083).

According to the size of the tumors, pT1 tumors show significantly lower peritumoral and intratumoral TIL levels than pT2 tumors (Wilcoxon-test p = 0.008 and p = 0.002, with global Kruskal–Wallis p -values of 0.043 and 0.018, respectively), whereas only borderline significant differences in the number of stromal TILs in different pT groups was observed (global Kruskal–Wallis p = 0.083, with a Wilcoxon-test p -value of 0.042 between pT1 and pT2 tumors) ( Figure S1B ).

The presence of gross blood in stool was borderline significant (adjusted OR 2.40, 95% CI 0.89–6.45, p = 0.083). 4.

In the total population, PRS as a continuous variable was borderline significant for CAD risk (HR, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.99–1.18], P =0.083).

When we applied the algorithm obtained from this ensemble to the testing sample, we obtained an AUC = 0.73 (95% CI Delong = 0.49–0.98) which was borderline significant ( p = 0.083).

Our data indicated a borderline significant difference in LRRFS between the INRT and BNRT groups in the PSM population (88.1% vs. 97.1%, p=0.083).

Conversely, when RUSC1-AS1 was modeled as the dependent variable, the regression was borderline significant ( F (12,25) = 1.91, p = 0.083, R 2 = 0.48).

For those measures for which there were significant effects of BAC, we found that none showed significant residual ‘hangover’ effects once BAC returned to 0% (Wilcoxon signed‐rank test, two‐tailed, P > 0.11), except for speed noise, which was borderline significant ( P = 0.0833).

TP measurements of single specimens before and after glazing showed a statistically significant increase in average TP for the 0.6 mm EM specimens ( P < .05), while the difference was borderline significant for the 1.0 mm EM specimens ( P = .084).