“borderline significant”

The Egger weighted regression method to detect publication bias identified a borderline significant asymmetry for trials considering death ( P =0.05).

The "miliary" pattern (>5 lesions) occurred only in the malignant group (13.9%) and was borderline significant (p=0.05), consistent with diffuse metastatic disease patterns.

miranda for this same chromosome and stage is borderline significant (p = 0.05, Wilcoxon rank sum test), with D. miranda showing more female bias.

Compared to S1 alone, the combination of S1 and S2 showed a borderline significant increase in fracture discrimination ( p = 0.05), which was not observed in the subset encompassing fractures of grades SQ1 to SQ3.

Although there was a tendency for Lactobacillus populations to increase after chitosan supplementation, the mean change in the amount of this microbial agent in the chitosan versus placebo group was estimated as borderline significant ( P = 0.05).

They also classified patients into two groups according to the status of liver metastasis, and indicated a borderline significant correlation between Smad4 staining and liver metastasis ( P =0.05) ( Maitra et al , 2000 ).

With the exception of the social functioning subscale, which indicated a borderline significant increase in the intervention group at week 12 with a score of 0 (0, 12.5) compared to the control group's −12.5 (−12.5, 12.5) ( p = 0.05), no significant differences in QOL scores were observed between the two groups during the follow‐up phase relative to the pre‐treatment phase.

According to education level, a borderline significant difference was observed among the groups (F = 2.43, p = 0.050).

The difference in neuron/neurotransmission score between the Sham and NRL groups was borderline significant (−0.4 ± 1.5 vs −4.0 ± 0.9, p = 0.050).

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 the fully adjusted model, negative RTW-expectations were borderline significant (p=0.050) while female gender significantly predicted benefit recipiency ( table 3 ).

A dose‐dependent effect on the relative bioavailability was incorporated into the model a priori and showed a borderline significant improvement in model fit ( p < .05, ∆OFV = −3.95).

For NEUTs, a borderline significant decrease was observed between points II and III ( p = 0.05).

IMT-CCA (borderline significant) and IMT-bulb at baseline were related to the change in plaque area over the 5 years (Spearman ́s rho = 0.13 and p -value = 0.050 for IMT-CCA and rho = 0.21 and p -value = 0.0036 for IMT-bulb.

The overall NMSS score was higher for women, although borderline significant (mean difference 4.41; range -0.02-8.85; p = 0.05), and with a high heterogeneity (I 2 = 69.7%) (Fig. 2A ).

For Pb, a borderline significant difference was detected ( p = 0.050), with tub gurnard showing slightly higher mean values; however, this finding is limited by the high proportion of missing Pb data (68.1%).

A borderline significant difference in survival was observed for patients with localised cancer stage ( p = 0.05).

Shown in Figure 2 , meta‐analysis of dichotomous cerebrovascular reactivity revealed a borderline significant association between an impaired cerebrovascular reactivity and an increased prevalence of cSVD (dichotomous predictor pooled OR, 2.26 [95% CI, 0.99–5.14], P =0.05).

There were no significant differences in demographic variables and cognitive assessment scores between the groups, except for a borderline significant difference ( P = 0.05) in the MOCA score (Supplementary Table 1 ).

There was a borderline significant association between getting biological treatment and having erosions (OR = 3.61, 95% CI: 1.04–14.45, p = 0.050) and a significant association between biological treatment and having moderate/severe DAS28-CRP (OR = 35.83, 95% CI: 10.18–164.94, p < 0.001).

Secondary analyses to examine the dose–response relationship between cognitive function and IL-6 showed MoCA quintiles to be a borderline significant predictor of cortisol AUC responses after surgery ( β = −0.176, CI = −906.318–−0.370, p = 0.050) after controlling for covariates.

Being consistently inactive was associated with higher odds of having overweight/obesity according to all outcomes (borderline significant for WHtR ≥ 0.6 (p = 0.05)) compared to being consistently active.

There was a borderline significant relationship between higher levels of donor INS ‐cfDNA and lower islet yield [−0.38 (0.18), p = .050] (Table 2 ).

There was a borderline significant result between age and the outcome variable (p = 0.05).

Gender shows a borderline significant association, with females having lower odds compared with males (odds ratios [OR] = 0.64, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.41–1.00, P = .05).