of borderline significancep = 0.074
A comparison of the sites of first metastatic disease among all four CTC change groups revealed differences of borderline significance (Chi-squared test, p = 0.074; Table 3 ).
A comparison of the sites of first metastatic disease among all four CTC change groups revealed differences of borderline significance (Chi-squared test, p = 0.074; Table 3 ).
Compared with never users, an inverse association of borderline significance was found for OC users (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.44–1.04, P = 0.074).
On multivariate analysis, high Gleason score (hazard ratio = 5.99, p = 0.007) was the only independent prognostic factor for lymph node recurrence, while advanced T stage was of borderline significance (hazard ratio = 2.68, p = 0.074) (Table 2 ).
A US cross-sectional study reported that an inverse correlation between dietary calcium intake as assessed by means of a 24-hour dietary recall and periodontal index as assessed based on visual and radiographic data was of borderline significance ( r = -0.24, P <0.075), while serum calcium concentration was not significantly correlated with periodontal index ( r =0.16) [ 6 ].
In a non-prespecified analysis it heterogeneity was detected between Māori males and females in kit return rates ( p = 0.035); this was of borderline significance for Pacific ( p = 0.075), with a stronger negative effect on participation observed in males than females.
We also observed a weak positive association between the duration of night shift work and the BMI and WHtR, which was of borderline significance (p = 0.075 and p = 0.073 respectively).
Three patients had marginally increased MRP mRNA levels following treatment (patient 1, 2.4-fold; patient 2, 1.6-fold; patient 4, 1.7-fold), however for only one of these (patient 1) was the difference of borderline significance (P = 0.075).
The difference in change across arms was of borderline significance for primary partner ( P = 0.075); no difference was seen for nonprimary partner ( P = 0.8).
The main effect of Group became of borderline significance (p = 0.075), as did the Group ∗ Region interaction (p = 0.055).
The difference between estrogen alone (32% [85 women]) and estrogen plus a progestin (40% [24 women]) was of borderline significance using the nonparametric test ( P = 0.076) but it was not significant in multivariate analysis.
The MFES × velocity-ML interaction was of borderline significance ( P = 0.076) while MFES interacted significantly with velocity-AP measure to influence fall risk ( P = 0.014).
Four regions display significant differences between the groups, including: dACC [ F (2, 39) = 4.714, p = 0.015, r = 0.635], left SI [ F (2, 39) = 5.757, p = 0.007, r = 0.741], and right SII [ F (2, 39) = 5.441, p = 0.021, r = 0.704], additionally left SII and right SI showed an effect of borderline significance [Left SII: F (2, 35) = 2.846, p = 0.076, r = 0.589; right SI F (2, 39) = 3.114, p = 0.056, r = 0.491].
Being prescribed warfarin was of borderline significance ( p =0.076) for a longer surgical delay, but there was no clear correlation between factor Xa inhibitor or thrombin inhibitor prescription ( p =0.340 and p =0.558) and hospital stay prior to surgery.
In PEDIA, jaundice and subcostal indrawing were associated with fatal outcome, while wasting was of borderline significance ( P = 0.076).
After this adjustment, for those with >60% Enterobacterales dominance in the gut, there is a 7.28-fold increase in the odds of bloodstream infection of borderline significance (OR, 7.28 [0.81, 65.36]; P = 0.076).
Post hoc t -tests (Bonferroni corrected) revealed that high PE subsequent accuracy (mean = 55.4 ± 6.6%) was significantly greater than that of the other levels (0 mean = 20.7 ± 2.1%, t (19) = 5.7, and p < 0.001; low mean = 24.4 ± 2.1%, t (19) = 4.9, and p < 0.001; and medium mean = 30.4 ± 3.5%, t (19) = 3.9, and p < 0.01), as well as a difference between medium and 0 PE accuracy of borderline significance ( t (19) = 2.8, p = 0.076).
As regards GSE score, Table 5 shows that the time (pre-post) and the study intervention were its statistically significant independent positive predictors, in addition to the number of substances used, although of borderline significance (p = 0.076).
Having spent time in an institution before the age of 16 was of borderline significance (odds ratio 1.7, p = 0.076).
For workshops using water-based MWF, handling activities appeared to increase the exposure to particles, although of borderline significance (p = 0.077).
The ERs for RCK1 and non-RCK1 domain variant-related epilepsy were 13.6 and 35.7%, respectively, and this difference was of borderline significance ( P = 0.077).
Lower levels of In in men were of borderline significance (0.064 μg/L (0.044–0.074) vs. 0.73 μg/L (0.062–0.082), p = 0.077).
For BRCA1/2 carriers uptake was higher in those with known PVs in their family at entry, 138/316 (43.7%) versus 55/163 (33.7%)-p = 0.04 those found later: 10-year uptake 47.5% (95%CI = 41.7–53.8) versus 39.4% (95%CI = 31.4–48.6) in those with PVs found later (OR = 1.2; 95%CI = 0.9–1.6)- Supplementary-table-4 , this was of borderline significance for BRCA1 (OR = 1.6; 95%CI = 0.99–2.4); p = 0.077 supplementary-figure-2 ).
This showed an interaction of borderline significance ( F 4,14 = 2.66, P = 0.077; partial eta squared = 0.432), driven by a borderline effect of stimulation on RT increase in short ISI trials ( F 2,16 = 3.249, P = 0.065; partial eta squared = 0.289).
While baseline EPI levels did not differ between HT and NT ( p =.67), HT showed higher mean NE baseline values of borderline significance ( F (1,47)=3.28, p =.077, η 2 p =.076, f =.29). 3.2.2.2 Trial Comparisons Infusions of the three trials induced differential catecholamine changes (main effects trial: NE: F (2,80)=43.80, p <.001, η 2 p =.523, f =1.05; EPI: F (2,80)=2.83, p =.065, η 2 p =.066, f =.27) as follows: NE.
In all treated individuals, changes in HbA 1c across time were of borderline significance (F = 2.70, p = 0.078), while changes in total cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol and triglycerides reached significant and clinically meaningful improvement during the 1-year follow-up (F = 11.64, p < 0.001; F = 6.50, p = 0.002; and F = 6.58, p = 0.003, respectively).