“borderline significant”

Improvement in work and social functioning was borderline significant (mean change −2.92, Hedges g = 0.28; P = 0.05).

Thirty-day all-cause mortality showed a borderline significant difference favoring TAVR (RR 0.55; 95 % CI 0.30–1.01; p = 0.05).

When all inflammation markers, significantly associated with breast cancer, were included together in the same model (model I) the risk estimates remained similar (i.e., the effects seemed to be independent of each other), but the association was only borderline significant for IL-1β (p = 0.05).

In the univariate analyses, the degree of DFA stenosis was a significant predictor for major amputation ( p = 0.04) and a borderline significant predictor of improvement of the ankle brachial index ( p = 0.05).

The regression analysis showed a positive association between maternal and offspring fasting glucose that was borderline significant (beta=0.18, 95% CI [-0.00027, 0.37], p=0.050).

The borderline significant effect of FSE on RMS5 at 7.00 mm ( p = 0.050) was unexpected, as FSE primarily targets spherical aberration (Z4 0 ) rather than fifth-order terms.

Our results showed a borderline significant difference between the two groups regarding 5STS ( p = 0.05).

The treatment group effect remained borderline significant ( p = 0.050).

Treatment protocols revealed a borderline significant difference ( p = 0.05).

There was a borderline significant relationship between perceived social support in the domain of significant others and OE ( P = 0.05).

This score showed a borderline significant difference between patients with AFVD (mean ± SD = 0.95 ± 0.12) and controls ( P = 0.05).

In the Ps of UK Biobank as exposure (nSNP = 7), the IVW method manifested a borderline significant positive link ( β = 0.024, 95%CI = 1.02 (1.00, 1.05); p = 0.050).

Years of professional experience had a borderline significant association with knowledge (p = 0.050).

The data is borderline significant at p<0.05 for the difference between the median of 56 pairs of flies.

The results of change in biochemical markers are summarized in Table 2 . In the responder analysis, the relative risk for a positive response was borderline significant ( p = 0.05) for active LEDT over placebo RR = 1.67 [95% CI 1.00–1.67], but there were no significant differences for any of the other treatment comparisons (Table 3 ).

At week 12, triglyceride levels increased significantly in the control-2 group ( P =0.01), while total cholesterol showed a borderline significant decrease ( P =0.05).

Furthermore, upon accounting for these confounders, there was a borderline significant difference for TyG across the tertiles of hPDI (P-value = 0.05) and a significant difference for TG (P-value = 0.04) in the adjusted model.

No association was observed between protein intake and TIR, TAR, or TBR ( p -values ≥ 0.07); however, a borderline significant reduction of −1.9% (95% CI: −3.9%, 0.0%; p = 0.05) TBR per 20 g protein was observed following MICT in analyses stratified by exercise mode.

A borderline significant positive association between MLR and AST was observed in the combined cohort (r = 0.188, p = 0.050).

The test for subgroup differences was borderline significant, P = 0.05, I 2 = 0%.

When comparing the AUCs of MELD-Na and the ML model, we observed a statistically borderline significant difference ( p = 0.05).

A borderline significant association remained after controlling for differences in age category, sex, and site location (odds ratio [OR]: 1.70, 95% CI [1.00, 2.88], p = 0.05).

However, the analysis demonstrated a borderline significant effect of zinc supplementation in combination with other micronutrients on the risk of malaria parasitaemia compared with placebo ( p = 0.05, log RR = 1.31, 95% CI: 0.03–2.59, I 2 = 99.22%, with 8904 malaria cases in the zinc intake group and 522 malaria cases in the placebo group).

In untreated cells, limited or no HIV gag-p24 protein was detected across all cell pellets (average 0.019 ± 0.009 pg/mL, assuming a value of 0.005 pg/mL for all samples with gag-p24 below the LOD), while anti-CD3/CD28 induced an average 0.138 ± 0.070 pg/mL of viral protein, or a borderline significant 7.6-fold increase over no-drug control ( P = 0.05; Fig. 4B ).

RT+HMB produced modest and borderline significant improvements in handgrip strength (SMD 0.24; 95% CI 0.00–0.48; p = 0.05) and moderate benefits in Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) scores (SMD 0.54; 95% CI 0.12–0.95; p = 0.01).