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 = 0.051.0× alphagold
Further subgroup analyses based on outcome categories indicated that the pooled effect sizes of sensory stimulation were significant for continuous data for swallowing measurements ( n = 14, SMD [95% CI] = 0.75 [0.27, 1.23], p < 0.01; I 2 = 76%) (Figure 5 ) and borderline significant for dichotomous data for readiness for decannulation ( n = 3, OR [95% CI] = 6.47 [1.10, 38.04]; p = 0.05; I 2 = 3%) (Figure 6 ). 3.6.
borderline significantp = 0.051.0× alphagold
Cortisol levels were also unaffected by the affiliative relationship between wolves (LR test, χ 2 = 2.1, p = 0.14; see the Supplemental Experimental Procedures ), though the rank of the individual leaving did seem to have a borderline significant effect (LR test, χ 2 = 10.8 df = 5, p = 0.05; see the Supplemental Experimental Procedures ).
borderline significantP =0.051.0× alphagold
Secondary Outcomes: Total and Aerobic Activity Times In phase I (Table 2 ), the unblinded and blinded groups were not significantly different in modifying their total activity times, whereas there was a borderline significant smaller decrease in aerobic time in unblinded patients (differential 8 minutes; 95% CI, 0 to 16; P =0.05).
borderline significantp = 0.051.0× alphagold
Secondary analyses Comparisons between individuals with high relative to low maternal cigarette consumption demonstrated a borderline significant reduction in second trimester BPD z score for the high compared to the low consumption group (four populations, mean reduction 0.09 [0, 0.19] p = 0.05) ( S3 Table ) and also for third trimester BPD z score (three populations, mean reduction 0.15 [0.03, 0.26] p = 0.01) and FL z score (three populations, mean reduction 0.17 [0.06, 0.28] p = 0.003), S4 Table .
borderline significantp = 0.051.0× alphagold
Philip Morris International’s representatives assisted the majority of points-of-sale implement the display ban (89.5% in Arab and 77.3% in Jewish neighborhoods), the only borderline significant difference was more points-of-sale in Arab neighborhoods being advised on how to navigate and overcome regulatory restrictions, (26.3% vs. 6.8%, p = 0.05 ) (Table 3 ).