“borderline non-significant”

Women also continued to show greater odds of participation than men when controlling for all other variables, although this effect was borderline non-significant (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.00–1.99, P = 0.053).

However, this association was attenuated and became borderline non-significant after full adjustment in Model 3 (OR=1.139, 95% CI: 0.988–1.314, p=0.053).

For control participants, the borderline non-significant correlations between the difference in heterophoria at distance and near and vergence and refractive state changes were r S = 0.42 ( p = 0.053) and r S = 0.42 ( p = 0.052), respectively.

A personal history of colonic lesions was associated with a numerically higher, but borderline non-significant, neoplastic lesions detection rate (OR 3.56; 95% CI, 0.98-12.90; P = .053).

Apart from the difference between standard criteria status 1 and exceptions in status 1 becoming borderline non-significant ( p = 0.053), these results were fully corroborated in the multivariable model.

This difference was borderline non-significant ( p = 0.053).

A borderline non-significant time effect was observed for peripheral systolic BP ( p = 0.053) and diastolic BP was reduced over time ( p = 0.027) with a non-significant time by treatment effect ( p = 0.053).

Moderate GCS impairment (9–12) showed a borderline non-significant trend (SHR 0.50, 95% CI 0.25–1.01, p = 0.053).

The VAS score demonstrated a borderline non-significant standardized mean difference of 0.34 (95% confidence interval: − 0.004 to 0.69; p = 0.053) in favor of four corner fusion.

Phage composition showed a borderline non-significant difference between responders and non-responders following FMT (pairwise PERMANOVA p = 0.054, Fig. 6B , Supplementary Fig. 7A ).

This relationship was significant for both the single and the repeated annual cycle (Tables 1 , 2 ) and borderline non-significant ( p = 0.054) during breeding (Table 3 ).

As reported in Table 1 , the percentage change in TEED from baseline to the last follow-up is significant in female patients (97.4 ± 241.1%, p ≤ 0.000), whereas in male patients the change is borderline non-significant (33.2 ± 404.3%, p = 0.054) after multiple comparison correction.

However, when TOP2A amplification and CEP17 duplication were combined, Kaplan-Meier and log-rank analyses showed a significant association with better DFS ( P = .026) and a borderline non-significant trend with OS ( P = .054; Figure 1 ).

There was also a borderline non-significant interaction Male strain × Female strain on offspring production (Male strain × Female strain: F 1,71 = 3.813, p = 0.054), where mating pairs with LP -infected males and AP ­-infected females had higher short-term offspring production ( figure 2 b ; see the electronic supplementary material for full analysis).

Additionally, total sperm count was higher in protocol 1, with a borderline non-significant difference ( p = 0.054).

an increase in male attractiveness; Dispersion: 0.333; Carbohydrate: F 1,104 = 3.044, p-value = 0.084; Table S2 ), which measures male attractiveness when focal males encounter an unreceptive females; there was also a borderline non-significant interaction protein*carbohydrate on the latency of females to mate with the focal male (Protein*Carbohydrate: F 1,99 = 3.799, p-value = 0.054, Table S2 ).

AD 858.4 [694.7–1171.5], p <0.001) and borderline non-significant for PH ( p =0.054).

Although borderline non-significant ( χ 2 test, P = 0.054), a higher percentage of patients with metastatic lymph nodes were identified in the MDACC cohort (i.e. 16% MDACC vs. 8.5% Bergen cohort).

RYGB patients had a lower 3 H-recovery than CTR, reflecting a slower transit ( p = 0.005, Figure 2 ), whereas SG did not differ from RYGB ( p = 0.665) and had a borderline non-significant difference with CTR ( p = 0.054).

The association with anemia was borderline non-significant ( p = 0.055).

The GISIS group had, on average, twice the total volume of secretions suctioned per patient compared with the GEvac group (26 ± 19 mL from 10 patients vs 13 ± 10 mL from 12 patients), but the result was borderline non-significant ( P = 0.055) ( Table 4 ).

Trim-and-fill imputed no missing studies for baseline FVC and one study for baseline DLCO; the adjusted pooled estimates for FVC became borderline non-significant ( p = 0.055), whereas the DLCO association remained significant after adjustment.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) was more frequent in the HFpEF group, though the difference was borderline non-significant (21.6% vs. 8.0%, p = 0.055).

The LS extension difference between the two strains is borderline non-significant (Non-parametric Mann-Whitney Test; P = 0.055).

For urothelial cancer, risk differences were borderline non-significant ( p = 0.055).