“marginal significance”

Furthermore, the presence of IICP symptoms before surgery showed a marginal significance (HR: 2.29, 95% CI: 0.99–5.30, p = 0.054).

In the multivariate analysis, high HCT‐CI (≥3) was the only independent factor for higher NRM (HR, 2.96; 95% CI, 1.11–7.90; p = 0.030), and ECOG score ≥2 was the only independent factor for inferior OS (HR, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.15–5.16; p = 0.020) and DFS (HR, 2.12; 95% CI, 1.13–4.02; p = 0.020), with marginal significance of disease status at transplantation for DFS (HR, 2.19; 95% CI, 0.99–4.88; p = 0.054) (Table 4 ).

Notably, certain variables exhibited marginal significance in univariate analysis (e.g., BUN in the internal validation cohort, p = 0.054).

While high TROP2 showed a marginal significance with high Ki67 at 20% cutoff ( P = .054).

Meta-analysis suggested a higher success rate in Biodentine group than CH group at a marginal significance (OR = 6.03, 95%CI: 0.97–37.6, P = 0.054; S5 Fig ).

Notably, the intraoperative diagnosis section showed marginal significance for conciseness ( p = 0.054), failing to reach the significance threshold.

A comparison of the two groups identified that LEDD was the only demographic which reached marginal significance, with participants in the SFG group treated with a higher LEDD ( M = 1015) compared to participants in the NSFG ( M = 694; p =.054).

The findings revealed that higher expression levels of FAM72B, C, and D were substantially linked with lower overall survival (p < 0.001, p = 0.002, and p = 0.002, respectively) while FAM72A showed marginal significance (p = 0.054) ( Table 2 ).

In multivariable analyses, older age (odds ratio [OR], 2.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.49–3.19; P < 0.001), low surgical volume (OR, 5.90; 95% CI, 2.10–17.01; P < 0.001), and high CPB time (OR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.08–1.18; P < 0.001) were identified as significant independent predictors of early mortality, while blood hemoglobin level showed marginal significance (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.54–0.99; P = 0.054).

TGF-β C-del showed a marginal significance (p = 0.054) and the frequency of low producing genotype C/CC of TGF-β was highest among RE showing 2.6-fold (OR, 2.677; 95%CI, 1.06−6.74; p = 0.037).

Ki-67 was associated with PD, but with marginal significance (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.0–1.04; P = 0.054).

This pattern was also seen in the multivariable model adjusted for SES factors (TC-BC, P = .016; TC-1st, P = .006; BC-1st, P = .789) but not in multivariable adjustment for both SES factors and tumor characteristics (all P > .05), except for an HR of 0.568 (95% CI, 0.319-1.011) for TC-1st vs TCnoBC, showing a marginal significance ( P = .054).

In a fully saturated model simultaneously including sex, mechanical ventilation and comorbidity count (six predictors for 33 events, well beyond the events-per-variable limit), the AISI effect retained a comparable magnitude (aOR 2.57) but reached only marginal significance (95% CI 0.98–6.72, p = 0.054), an attenuation attributable to over-parameterization rather than to loss of signal, and one that underscores why the pre-specified parsimonious model was the appropriate primary specification.

Statistical significance between MRS and endometriosis in the combined model was only observed in the CIR ( p = 0.0072) test set, yet marginal significance was also seen in the UCSF ( p = 0.0541) and IMB ( p = 0.0697) test sets.

Only SNP 9508994 (C/T) in the mother genome was found to interact with SNP 20209376 with marginal significance (p-value = 0.0547).

Postoperative tibial end-of-stem pain was reported in 9.8% of the non-screw group, while none (0%) in the screw group, reflecting marginal significance ( P = 0.0548).

A lower risk was observed in patients on treatment for thyroid pathology with marginal significance ( p = 0.055).

The INFLA score had a partial mediating effect with marginal significance, with PM for 2.4% ( P = 0.055) and NIE for HR (95%CI): (1.0126, 0.9999–1.0256, P = 0.052) (Fig. 3 I).

The measure of x-flips only attained marginal significance, with 4% of its variance explained by trial and block trial ( p = .055).

Several hematological ratios demonstrated marginal significance: MLR ( p = 0.055), MHR ( p = 0.027), PHR ( p = 0.039), and SII, SIRI, and NHR approached statistical significance.

102.6 μmol/L, P =0.024), while IBIL showed marginal significance (68.8–84.6 μmol/L, P =0.055).

PD-L1 exhibited marginal significance among distinct subtypes (Kruskal-Wallis, p=0.055; figure 1A ) and was still a predictor for PFS (HR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.98 to 1.00, p=0.005) when adjusting for PTCL subtypes in the multivariate Cox regression algorithm ( figure 1C and online supplemental figure S1B ), indicating the strong and relatively independent predictive capability of PD-L1.

The marginal significance zone was defined as p -values between 0.05 and 0.1, indicating nominal trends. hsa-miR-23a-3p exhibited a trend for upregulation ( p = 0.055), while hsa-miR-17-3p tended to be higher in the Control group.

1-AP also had a negative link (β = −37) with marginal significance ( P = 0.055).

All patients were receiving 250mg AG 4 x daily plus 20mg HC b.d. marginal significance between the rise in A4 androstenedione and the rise in 17 OH progesterone (Figure 3) (r = 0.562, P = 0.055).