“borderline significant”

Keloid patients reported having had eczema more frequently but this difference was only borderline significant (31% vs. 24%, P = 0.125).

Σ 10 OPFR metabolites in urine are 3.25 ± 2.84, 3.06 ± 2.21, 1.75 ± 1.10, and 2.32 ± 2.29 μg/L in the age groups comprising of newborns, 1-5 year-olds, 6-10 year-olds, and 11-18 year-olds, respectively, and borderline significant differences were found in the different age groups ( p =0.125).

65.8%, p = 0.095) was borderline significant for decreased LRC, with similar trends on multivariable analysis (HR 1.636, p = 0.126) and for OS (HR 1.476, p = 0.130).

Further, AKI stage ≥2 had a borderline significant association with MAKE50 (adjusted OR 1.97, 95% CI: 1.09–3.58, p = 0.126) ( Table 4 ). 3.4.

The high T stage was clearly prognostically unfavorable ( p = 0.030) and the N stage was only borderline significant ( p = 0.127) ( Supplementary Figure S2 ).

Within 2 years after surgery, LN metastasis was potentially significant (HR, 40.943; p < 0.001), whereas beyond 2 years, it was borderline significant (HR, 3.493; p = 0.13).

in cases with non-vulnerable victims, the difference was borderline significant (p = 0.13 and p = 0.16, resp.). 3.3.

When network factors from the above three domains were examined in the same model, the role of family support remained statistically significant (p<0.0001), The association with the degree of being connected to peers in the class, as measured by the normalised degree centrality, became borderline significant (p=0.13).

These associations remained borderline significant after additional adjustment for sugar‐containing beverage intake and body mass index at school age ( P = 0.13).

Univariate analysis showed that overall, a CD3-positive cell frequency >25% was associated with a borderline significant difference in PFS and OS compared with a CD3-positive cell frequency below or equal to 25% ( P =0.132 and P =0.064, respectively).

Interestingly, we discovered a borderline significant correlation between OSCC and LN (P = 0.1365, Fig. 2 G).

An exception was the relationship between average financial resources and for number of depressive symptoms, which appeared borderline significant in the complete case analysis (β = 0.38; 95%CI: -0.12, 0.89; p = 0.137, Table 3 , Model 3), but showed no relationship in the achievable N analysis (β = -0.13; 95%CI: -0.26, 0.53, p = 0.51, Table 4 , Model 3). 4 Discussion Using HRS, a nationally representative cohort that has been particularly influential in lifecourse and aging research, we developed and validated a theoretically motivated index of cSES.

Moxifloxacin administration was borderline significant ( F value 2.18, p = 0.14) but with limited effect, and the interaction between glucose and moxifloxacin was also borderline significant ( p = 0.067) suggesting the effect of moxifloxacin in addition to glucose on the QTcF is additive, not exponential, reflected in the similar regression line slopes.

Patients with higher score of the immune response module IMMUNE1 showed no significant tamoxifen benefit (HR (95% CI) = 0.67 (0.34–1.33)), whereas patients with low IMMUNE1 score did (HR (95% CI) = 0.35 (0.20–0.61)) with borderline significant interaction test in univariate ( p = 0.14) and multivariable analyses ( p = 0.09) ( Figure 6 E,F).

There were numerical differences in the lag time for GE solids, GE t 1/2 of liquids, and CF6 of solids ( Table 2 ); however, these were borderline significant (0.05 > P < 0.14).

The study will be stopped if no significant or borderline significant ( p < 0.15) differences are found between the active control group and the two + AAT groups for any primary or secondary outcome.

The following significant ( P ≤ .05) and borderline significant variables ( P ≤ .15) calculated by a univariate analysis were included in the Cox regression: bypass RCA, EuroSCORE II, preoperative body mass index, atrial fibrillation, familiar predisposition, hyperlipidemia, smoking, and stroke.

One additional borderline significant ( P ≤ 0.15) variable was selected for multivariable analysis, namely female sex ( P = 0.118) ( Table 4 ).

Variables with significant or borderline significant associations (P < 0.15) with outcomes and the interaction between non-proportional hazards variables and time effect were introduced into the stepwise time-dependent Cox model to evaluate the associations between factors and outcomes.

A borderline significant difference in lymph node size was observed in patients with malign and benign pathologies (2.2 ± 0.6 cm vs. 1.9 ± 0.4 cm; P = 0.15).

Shank as a mediator between the foot and the thigh taking into account standing conditions The crude and adjusted to shank effect of the foot on thigh were different (p=.07 borderline significant, p=.15 non-significant, respectively) ( Figure 2a , Table 3 ).

15.5 months), although the difference was only borderline significant (HR 0.77; 95% CI, 0.54–1.10, P=0.15).

The probability that the informant's CESD score is above the median increased by 13pp among primary caretakers, compared to approximately 8pp among non‐caretakers – a difference that is borderline significant ( p = .15).

The “Node Involvement” variable shows a borderline significant association ( P = .151) where patients with blood type O seem to have a higher incidence of node involvement.

Binary logistic regression again demonstrated a borderline significant association between BED and responder status ( p = 0.155), with excellent model discrimination (AUC = 0.850).