Barely Significant

Excerpts

33,758 sentences · 1 filter applied

As presented in Table 3 , a higher ALP level was significantly associated with a significantly higher likelihood of being classified into stage 2 (RRR: 1.23; 95% CI: 1.11, 1.37; p < 0.001), stage 3 (RRR: 1.99; 95% CI: 1.48, 2.67; p < 0.001), stage 4a (RRR: 1.29; 95% CI: 1.14, 1.46; p < 0.001), and stage 4b (RRR: 1.35; 95% CI: 1.16, 1.58; p < 0.001 ) while the association of stage 1 (RRR: 1.1; 95% CI: 0.99, 1.22; p = 0.074) was marginally significant referring to stage 0.
highly significantqualifiedgold
Health characteristics and knowledge and practice domains showed a highly significant influence on supplement consumption, whereas the demographic domain did not show a significant association in the structural equation model, although several demographic variables were significantly associated with supplement use in bivariate analysis.
We have: • Corrected this error throughout the manuscript • Removed all references to antiseptic omission as a "critical risk factor" • Added explanatory text about why the McNemar test p-value may be significant even with mOR=1.00 when based on very sparse data • Excluded this variable from multivariable modeling due to instability The revised Table 5 (lines 420-443) now correctly shows: Variable Comparison Matched Odds Ratio (mOR) 95% CI p-value Antiseptic application Yes vs No 1.00 0.06-18.09 0.006 We have added the following explanatory note in the results section (lines 457-464): "Application of an antiseptic at the injection site prior to vaccination showed a statistically significant difference between cases and controls based on the exact McNemar test (p = 0.006).