“borderline significant”

The FUSION p-value was higher in this case, but remained borderline significant (p=0.155562).

Borderline significant correlations with ACQ improvement were found ( r = 0.30 p = 0.16 for 5 Hz and r = 0.41 p = 0.05 for 19 Hz).

302 (AK) days, p = 0.97), mice with an additional oncogenic mutation of Trp53 (AKPr mice) had a borderline significant shorter median survival (186 days, p = 0.16).

Overall, the MOO-Sr procedure also gave consistently higher AUC values than MOO-Tr although p values were borderline significant ( p value = 0.16).

Logistic Regression According to the univariable logistic regression analysis for mortality, the duration of hernia, BUN, and the presence of herniated intestine were significant prognostic factors ( p = 0.003, p = 0.030, and p = 0.008, respectively), while age, leukocytosis, alanine aminotransferase (ALT) concentration, and coexisting disease were borderline significant prognostic factors ( p = 0.161, p = 0.051, p = 0.112, and p = 0.192, respectively) ( Table 2 ).

A high level of heterogeneity was noted for leucine (amino acid) with an I 2 of 9% and a borderline significant pleiotropy (Egger intercept p-value = 0.1682), suggesting the need for cautious interpretation.

Marginal tests identified Lineage (N versus S) as the primary driver of variation ( p = 0.016), while Region ( p = 0.046) showed a borderline significant effect, and Host ( p = 0.178) did not reach statistical significance.

The intensified treatment in patients with M-ETE might also have been caused by the borderline significant higher prevalence of R1 resection in patients with M-ETE (18.8 % vs. 10.0 % in the TCT subgroup; p = 0.18): All patients with R1 resection (14.4 %) underwent RAIT.

The group with higher hs-CRP levels (> 2 mg/L) had a higher hazard ratio for seroprevalence (HR 1.66) compared to the group with lower hs-CRP levels (HR 1.05), with the multiplicative interaction between the virus and CRP being borderline significant (p = 0.180).

This association was not significant after correcting for multiple comparisons in the unadjusted model but was significant in the adjusted model (PR: 0.95 (0.92, 0.97); corrected p < 0.001). There was a borderline significant difference in the prevalence of the human fecal marker on child hands between arms in the adjusted model (PR: 0.66 (0.44, 0.99); corrected p = 0.19).

Male gender ( P = 0.09), unemployment ( P = 0.08), and patients who did not disclose their HIV status to at least one friend or family member ( P = 0.06) were borderline significant ( Table 2 ); all were included in the final multivariate model, however, since P <0.20.

Variables that were found to be borderline significant ( p < .2) in the adjusted bivariate models ( Appendix 2 ) were included in the multivariate models presented in Table 2 .

Risk factors significant or borderline significant ( P ≤0.20) in the univariate analyses were included in a multivariate random effects logistic regression model adjusting for the effect of household clustering.

Model C (the final result) was mutually adjusted for all other significant or borderline significant predictors selected using stepwise analyses with a critical P < 0.20.

Variables with significant or borderline significant values (p≤0.2) in the univariate analysis were entered into the Cox model for multiple analyses.

Epidural Analgesia and the Risk of Mortality In the univariate analysis, a borderline significant association was noted between EA and the risk of mortality after curative surgery for pancreatic cancer (HR = 1.21, p = 0.20, Fig. 1 B).

These covariates were selected because they exhibited significant or borderline significant differences (p < 0.20) between the RPL and control groups in univariable analyses (Table I) and are recognized in the literature as potential confounders in studies of RPL, given their associations with inflammation, hematological status, thrombotic risk, and the outcome of interest.

AA), Egger's test was borderline significant ( t = 2.054, df = 7, p = 0.2035) but above the conventional significance threshold, and Begg's test was not significant ( z = 1.25, p = 0.2109).

In the BMI I subgroup, GS demonstrated either a borderline significant association or no significant association at all ( p = 0.211 in males and p = 0.042 in females).

No significant difference in long-term mortality (OR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.58–1.28, p < 0.01, I 2 = 74%; Figure 3 ) and a borderline significant difference in cardiac death (OR = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.44–1.00, p = 0.23, I 2 = 60%; Figure 4 ) were found between MV-PCI and CO-PCI groups.

In contrast, there is a borderline significant difference among the intercepts of dry season life forms (wet season, slopes P = 0.234, intercepts P = 0.945; dry season, slopes P = 0.353, intercepts P = 0.058).

For green tea (therapeutic), the low‐ROB subgroup was not significant (MD −0.47 μm; 95% CI: −1.29 to 0.36; I 2 = 91.7%), whereas the medium‐ROB subgroup remained borderline significant (MD −1.48 μm; 95% CI: −2.94 to −0.01; I 2 = 79.7%) and groups did not differ (Q_b = 1.39, p = 0.239) (Figure S5 ) .

However, the recurrence varied by biomarker subtype, and when examined over the full study period ( P = 0.056 and P = 0.014, respectively), these differences were borderline significant but leveled off after the introduction of trastuzumab after 2005 ( P = 0.24 and P = 0.42, respectively) ( 21 ).

By intention-to-treat analysis, the composite endpoints of MACE occurred in 14 patients in the cilostazol group (10.4%) and in 20 patients in the placebo group (15.2%), leading to a borderline significant risk reduction in the primary composite endpoints (hazard ratio [HR], 0.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.34–1.33, p = 0.25) with cilostazol treatment.

After controlling for BMI, parity, umbilical resistance and umbilical artery position, results were very similar to those of the unadjusted analysis, which means that diameter showed a borderline significant association with FGR (SGA: OR = 0.60, 95% CI = 0.24–1.49, p value = 0.272; FGR: OR = 0.54, 95% CI = 0.28–1.03, p value = 0.063).