“borderline significant”

22 Two-way ANOVA showed a borderline significant effect of genotype on winning (F = 5.48, df = 2, 136, P = .05) but no significant effect of sex or sex by genotype interaction.

In addition, multivariate analyses revealed a borderline significant association between locality and 8-oxodG in the urine of all newborns (p = 0.05).

Gender was found to be borderline significant in univariate analysis ( p = 0.05) but not significant in multivariate models, which is in line with our findings regarding gender 31 .

BOLD, a community-based intervention, demonstrated borderline significant decreases in perceived pain as moderate/severe (45.5% to 38.2% at post-test; p = 0.05) [ 37 ].

Specifically, we observed a statistically significant 25% decrease in claudin-2, a 20% decrease in claudin-3, and a borderline significant ( p < 0.05, one-tailed Student’s t-test) 35% decrease in claudin-5 because of quercetin treatment.

These differences in treatment effects were borderline significant (p = 0.05) (Fig. 3 E, F).

In the unadjusted comparison of outcomes between the IMN and ORIF pairs, there were no statistically significant differences, although the greater prevalence of revisions in the ORIF cohort was borderline significant ( p = 0.05) (Table 3 ).

Age showed a borderline significant link with mortality (p=0.05), suggesting a slight risk increase with age.

Lastly, for the lifestyle measures only BMI showed significant mean differences ( P < 0.05), with cognitive activity showing borderline significant difference ( P = 0.05) between Aβ+ and Aβ− participants ( Table 2 ).

In sustained ROSC to admission, a borderline significant decreased outcome was noted in the outdoor group (33.4% vs. 25.7%, P = 0.05), whereas the outcome of survival to hospital discharge and good neurological outcomes did not differ between 2 groups (11.6% vs. 8.1%, P = 0.19 in survival to hospital discharge; 6.9% vs. 3.4%, P = 0.09 in good neurological outcome). 3.3.

There was a borderline significant difference between pre‐presentation and comparison intention to complete the test ( p = 0.05), with 66% intending to do so in the intervention group and 79% in the comparison group.

In the present study, CRP levels were higher in deceased patients compared to survivors, although this difference was borderline significant ( p = 0.05).

The Constant scores also showed more improvement in group S&P than group S at 2 years after surgery, but the mean difference in scores was borderline significant (13.4 vs 9.9, respectively; P = .050).

After further adjustment for age, only a smaller putamen volume fraction remained borderline significant with an OR of 0.699 ([95% CI 0.481, 0.987], p = 0.050). 3.3.

The overall regression was borderline significant (R 2 = 0.12, F(1,30) = 4.19, p = 0.05).

The PFS results according to high-risk status were borderline significant ( p = 0.05) ( Figure 4 ).

The difference in median score was borderline significant between CUBBITT and the reference text (p-value = 0.05), whereas it was statistically significant between CUBBITT and DeepL (p-value = 0.03), and between CUBBITT and Google Translate (p-value = 0.001).

In the worst-case scenario, all excluded patients were assumed to experience UNOs, yielding a borderline significant increase in UNO risk for RTS compared to LTS (RR 1.09; 95% CI 1.00–1.19; p = 0.05; I 2 = 33%; Fig.

Perineural invasion showed a borderline significant difference in distribution among the groups (P=0.05).

Correlation analyses found that SVF performance was significantly or borderline significantly associated with glymphatic function ( FDR-corrected p < 0.05 for all DTI-ALPS index and FDR-corrected p = 0.057 for CPV) in TLE patients.

no significant difference between first responders that participated in special operations or non-special operations regarding the importance of health monitoring preferences; (6) there was a significant association between age group of the respondent and cortisol levels (stress) ( p = 0.02) and a borderline significant association between age group of the respondent and skin resistance ( p = 0.05); (7) there was a significant association between special operations and biological proteins ( p = 0.03); and (8) there was a significant association between age group of the respondent and carbon dioxide ( p = 0.03).

Age was a borderline significant predictor ( p = 0.05).

The group difference in ‘stds above the surrogate’ was borderline significant, t (44) = 1.99, p = 0.05, d = 0.60, with the IB group mean being slightly higher.

Results were considered statistically significant at P < 0.05, with P values for borderline significant results approaching P = 0.05 also reported.

Philip Morris International’s representatives assisted the majority of points-of-sale implement the display ban (89.5% in Arab and 77.3% in Jewish neighborhoods), the only borderline significant difference was more points-of-sale in Arab neighborhoods being advised on how to navigate and overcome regulatory restrictions, (26.3% vs. 6.8%, p = 0.05 ) (Table 3 ).