Additionally, resilience showed a borderline significant moderation for physical abuse on lifetime suicidal behavior ( β = −0.0024, p = 0.0479) and recent suicidal behavior ( β = −0.0017, p = 0.05) and total ACEs on recent suicidal behavior ( β = −0.0004, p = 0.0514).
What underlying mechanisms related to resilience (e.g., coping skills, social support access, emotional regulation) might explain these differences? Conflicting Results on Suicidality Moderation: The abstract and results text state minimal moderation effect on suicidality overall, yet Table 3 shows significant moderation for EN*Resilience on lifetime ideation, PA*Resilience on lifetime behaviour (p=0.0479, weakly significant), and TACEs*Resilience on recent behaviour (p=0.0514, borderline).
physical abuse on lifetime behavior (p = 0.0479), and total ACEs on recent behavior (p = 0.0514)." While p=0.0479 is significant, p=0.0514 is strictly non-significant by the p<0.05 criterion (though borderline). Would the authors consider rephrasing the p=0.0514 finding in the abstract, perhaps as "borderline significance" or by focusing on clearly significant effects to maintain conciseness and precision, or explicitly state their alpha if it differs? "Resilience impact on suicidality differs according to the kind of ACE..." This is a key finding.