Barely Significant
← all phrases

“borderline significant”

11,410 sentences · 11,410 papers · 14,072 search hits before verification · confirmed specimen

Sighted at

p=0.09

Listed by Hankins (2013) · Otte et al. (2022)

In the literature

[ 47 ], conducted on Italian patients with clinically localized prostate adenocarcinoma, indicated a borderline significant association between UPFs consumption and higher odds of PC in the energy-adjusted model, though association was no longer significant after adjustment for other confounders such as age, BMI, education, smoking status, and physical activity.
In low-income, pathogen- and fecal contamination-rich, urban settings where sanitary conditions are poor, our study suggests better sanitary conditions measured via a sanitary survey may be associated with lower measures of environmental fecal contamination relative to poorer scores, though the absolute difference in contamination between poor and better sanitary conditions is minor and the association we found was borderline significant.
Compared to recent GWA studies (see below), these studies were all based on small clinical samples (hundreds of individuals) with variable reporting practices and borderline significant results, compared to tens of thousands of individuals, harmonized genotyping platforms and protocols and stringent significance levels used in recent GWA studies.
Simple retrospective logistic regression analysis showed that the mid-follicular exogenous concentrations of human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG) ( p = 0.027), provided by the HP-hMG preparation, and female age ( p = 0.009) were significantly associated with live-birth rate, while the mid-follicular progesterone concentration ( p = 0.075), the estradiol concentration on last stimulation day ( p = 0.075) and number of embryos transferred ( p = 0.071) were borderline significant.
In the crude model, higher EDIP tertiles showed a borderline significant association with PCOS (OR: 2.01; 95% CI: 1.01–4.01; P -trend = 0.04), but this association attenuated after multivariable adjustment, including age, BMI, energy intake, physical activity, educational level, marriage status, parity, employment status, household income, history of diabetes mellitus, and hypothyroidism (OR: 1.50; 95% CI: 0.56–4.00; P -trend = 0.13).
Differences were considered as ‘not significant’ with (adjusted) p -values > 0.1, as ‘borderline significant’ (#) with (adjusted) p -values between 0.05 and 0.1, as ‘significant’ (*) with (adjusted) p -values between 0.01 and 0.05, as ‘highly significant’ (**) with (adjusted) p -values between 0.001 and 0.01, as ‘very highly significant’ (***) with (adjusted) p -values between 0.0001 and 0.001 and as ‘extremely significant’ (****) with (adjusted) p -values < 0.0001.