showed a trendp = 0.088
1.18–5.54]; p = 0.017), while pro-ADM showed a trend for an association with this outcome (OR 1.93 [95%C.I. 0.9–4.12]; p = 0.088) (Table 3 , panel B).
1.18–5.54]; p = 0.017), while pro-ADM showed a trend for an association with this outcome (OR 1.93 [95%C.I. 0.9–4.12]; p = 0.088) (Table 3 , panel B).