“borderline significant”

The fully adjusted model (model 3) showed a borderline significant decreased risk of BC for optimal values of 25(OH)D (≥75 nmol/L) (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.47–1.01, p = 0.054), and a significant decreased risk of high optimal values of 25(OH)D (≥100 nmol/L) (HR 0.35, 95% CI 0.19–0.64, p = 1.0·10 −3 ), compared to the insufficient category (50–74 nmol/L).

After adjustment for age and prevalence of hypertension, left atrial dilation, and congestive heart failure, the association of LVDD patients and elevated LVFP with ESUS was borderline significant (aOR: 2.17, 95% CI: 0.99–4.77, p = 0.054), whereas LVDD and normal LVFP was not significantly associated with ESUS (aOR: 1.03, 95% CI: 0.61–1.77, p = 0.903) ( Table 4 ).

The protective effect was stronger in non‐diabetic patients (47.5% relative risk reduction) than in diabetic patients (24.4% relative risk reduction), with a borderline significant interaction ( p = 0.054). 3.5 Multiple Testing Corrections and Sensitivity Analyses Multiple testing corrections and sensitivity analyses are presented in Table 5 and Figure S2 .

This difference remained after adjustment for age and BMI, and became borderline significant after further adjustment for fat mass ( Table 5 , p = 0.054).

The Spearman correlation values for adult reconstruction, foot and ankle, musculoskeletal oncology, pediatrics, spine, and trauma were not significant, although the value for pediatrics was borderline significant (p = 0.054).

In accordance with the proportionally larger increase in W than H, the height/weight ratio decreased significantly between the age groups of 4.0–4.5 and 5.0–5.5 years (p = 0.050), and the difference between age group 3.5–4.0 and 5.0–5.5 was borderline significant (p = 0.054).

A borderline significant association was seen between MDI and eotaxin (standardized β = 0.25, p = 0.054) in a similar linear regression analysis.

There was a borderline significant difference in the cumulative incidence function ( P = 0.054).

When analysing the 97 couples with moderate support for transmission, the couple effect (which tests whether viral load set-points are similar within couples, see Methods ) was found to be borderline significant ( p = 0.054) by single factor ANOVA.

The 51 min difference in light PA in favor of the CP group was borderline significant ( p = 0.054).

Gender was a borderline significant factor influencing community composition ( P = 0.054) (see Fig.

3.3 Type D personality and self-care management A borderline significant difference in overall self-care management behaviors was observed between the two groups ( t = 1.942, P = 0.054).

Purified EPA was associated with a borderline significant reduction of 21.5% in CV risk in the primary endpoint ( P = 0.054) and a significant reduction of 26.6% in the secondary composite endpoint ( P = 0.03) vs. statin monotherapy.

They were also more likely to choose survival length over balance between side-effects and survival as their main priority when choosing between treatment options, but this was borderline significant ( p = 0.054).

Belonging to a household with a Muslim head was associated with a 51.63% lower likelihood of receiving PZQ than belonging to a household with a Christian head (this was borderline significant; P = .054).

A borderline significant difference was observed between groups ( P = 0.054), with cold packs showing a borderline significant difference compared to the control group ( P = 0.051).[ 37 38 ] A randomized controlled study compared the efficacy of audiovisual distraction, topical anesthesia, and cold spray application in reducing pain during venipuncture.

However, the pairwise comparisons of the EMM showed no significant changes from baseline in the control condition ( p = 0.062), while a significant increment was found in the “active*stable 360° video” condition ( p = 0.014) alongside a borderline significant increment in the “active*3D model” condition ( p = 0.054).

[ 9 ] reported a borderline significant ( p value = 0.054) increase in Y-BOCS scores in patients with combined OCD/ASD patients compared to OCD/non-ASD patients.

Due to the low total number of incidences, this was borderline significant (Fisher’s exact test: p -value = 0.054).

Per each 1- sd increase in SAF, there was a borderline significant increase in f res after adjusting for all potential confounding factors (0.1-Hz increase in f res per 1- sd increase in SAF, p=0.054).

The baseline concentration of the biomarker higher than 212 μg·mL −1 was significantly associated with increased risk of disease progression (PFS HR 2.5 (1–6), p -value = 0.042, Figure 3 F), and there was a borderline significant association with increased risk of death (OS HR 2.6 (0.98–7.1), p -value = 0.054, Figure 3 H).

Group 3 (hazard ratio = 1.48, 95% CI 1.05–2.09, p = 0.027) and stage (hazard ratio = 1.98, p = 1.2 × 10 –5 ) remained independent predictors of poor prognosis, although MSI was a borderline significant indicator of good prognosis (hazard ratio = 0.59, p = 0.054).

More frequent exposure to food ADs showed a positive but borderline significant association with ordering behaviour (e.g., freq category 3: OR = 2.65, p = 0.054).

For the angina frequency domain, the difference was borderline significant (59.2% vs. 53.4%, P = 0.054).

It was detected a borderline significant difference in control's systolic pressure ( P = 0.054) and also in MetS group's BMI, waist and TC in those with 2548G/A genotypes (0.05 < P < 0.08).