“borderline significant”

Whey protein supplementation resulted in a borderline significant ( p = 0.051) greater weight loss but also in a significantly greater absolute fat-free mass loss.

However, the use of gallstone prevention medication showed a borderline significant relationship with gallstone diagnosis ( p = 0.051) ( Table 8 ). 3.10.

There was also a reduction in total cholesterol (p = 0.03), as well as borderline significant reductions in LDL-cholesterol and the ratio of total cholesterol to HDL-cholesterol (both p = 0.051).

After additional correction for age and sex, it was still borderline significant ( P = 0.051), which may be caused by the low sample size.

The total effect of physical activity was found borderline significant (β = -0.11, p = 0.051).

Both the categories of “most advanced degree in education” and “total household income” exhibited a borderline significant association with HL ( p = 0.051 and p = 0.052, respectively).

However, if stent placement was compared separately to acute resection, a borderline significant difference in favor of stent was found (27.3 vs. 39.6 %, p = 0.051) (Table 3 ).

There was a borderline significant association of increased RFS with DM (p=0.051).

Similarly, there was a significant reduction in TNF-α, the other primary endpoints after the egg breakfast period, while IL-6 was, was borderline significant ( p = 0.051).

Furthermore, using a paired t -test, we found a significant increase in pesticide safety practices ( p < 0.05) in the intervention group and a borderline significant increase regarding in-home safety ( p = 0.051) in the control group.

The difference in confidence between the seventh year students compared to sixth year students (78.9% vs 45%) was borderline significant ( p = 0.051).

This was only statistically significant for CRT and less interest in sex ( P =0.01) and borderline significant for CRT and RT and less sexual activity (both P =0.051).

Regarding heterogeneity ( Table S6 ), type of respiratory infection emerged as borderline significant (p = 0.051, Figure S7 ) with a stronger pooled effect size seen for pneumonia (pooled RR = 4.15, 95% CI = 3.42–5.04) compared to studies that grouped influenza and pneumonia together (pooled RR = 2.78, 95% CI = 1.95–3.96).

While a higher BMI (OR: 0.832, p = 0.017) and ferritin (OR: 1.022, p = 0.031) levels independently predicted GDM, the predictive value of ferritin was borderline significant when combined with glucose tests (area under the curve = 0.689, p = 0.051).

The change from baseline evaluations The change from baseline for most of the evaluations was not significantly different between the two groups (Supplementary Table 1 in Supplementary Material), except that after 3 months of administration there was a borderline significant difference at HbA1c between the two groups for subset individuals (−0.4 ± 0.5% for mcIRBP-19-BGE vs. 0.2 ± 0.8% for placebo, P = 0.051).

When we included all parameters in the model, only Th density was borderline significant ( p = 0.051), but the model could correctly predict the responses in 83.9% of the patients (75% was the baseline). 3.4.

However, it is important to note that some of the effect sizes, such as the borderline significant total indirect effect observed between TC and ln(HOMA) ( p = 0.051), should be interpreted cautiously.

The mixed model analysis yielded an effect for Time ( F = 5.41; df = 8, p < .001), a trend for Condition ( F = 4.84; df = 1, p = .061) and a borderline significant interaction for Time × Condition ( F = 2.32; df = 8, p = .051).

In addition, we found a borderline significant association with mortality in diabetic subjects within our cohort (unadjusted P = 0.051; AA vs.

The exceptions were the significant difference concerning abdominal obesity (31/76 [40.8%] vs 7/38 [18.4%], χ 2 = 5.7, P = 0.017, OR = 3.05 [95% CI 1.2–7.8]) and the borderline significant difference concerning reduced HDL (9/76 [11.8%] vs 10/38 [26.3%], χ 2 = 3.8, P = 0.051, OR = 0.38 [95% CI 0.14–1.0]) [not shown].

After separate analysis for the patients without and with Fabry nephropathy ( Table 7 ), the difference in patients without nephropathy was no longer significant ( p = 0.401 and p = 0.263, respectively), whereas the difference in the expression of miR-29a-3p in the patients with nephropathy remained significant ( p = 0.017), and the expression of miR-200a-3p was borderline significant ( p = 0.051).

Chi-squared analysis of the POEM categories and ISAAC severe cases was borderline significant (p = 0.051) ( Table 4 ).

Results: Post-intervention, the exercise group showed statistically significant improvement ( p = 0.015) in BBS and borderline significant improvement in MS Walking Scale ( p = 0.051), both with large effect sizes (3.66; −2.89).

After the boost, antibody titers were not significantly different between dosages, however, the 0.20 μg group showed borderline significant higher titers ( p = 0.0510).

The difference in recurrence rate between patients with STUMP (6.3%) and the reclassified group (66.7%) was borderline significant (P = 0.051).