“marginal significance”

Full model (BRI + BMI + WC) In the full model, BRI Q4 retained marginal significance (OR = 11.70, P = 0.053), while BMI-based and waist-based obesity remained non-significant.

S7 , the low NLR cutoff subgroup exhibited predictive value for AKI (OR 1.526, 95% CI 1.38–1.68, p < 0.001) without significant inter-study heterogenicity ( I 2 = 29.1%), whereas the high-cutoff group showed limited predictive utility with marginal significance (OR 1.334, 95% CI 1.00–1.79, p = 0.0535) and the heterogenicity in this subgroup remained significant ( I 2 = 93%).

In addition, IL-1RA concentrations differed with a statistically marginal significance ( p = 0.0535) between the two severity subgroups.

( 42 ), NLR had a statistically significant association with ORR (p = 0.016), while PLR had a marginal significance (p = 0.0536). 3.2.6 Head and neck cancers A study by Lee et al.

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

More, marginal significance was observed for loss of liberty (U = 70.98, p < 0.054).

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

Population density alone showed no significant effect ( F (1,3) = 4.31, p = 0.129), and the insecticide × density interaction approached marginal significance ( F (3,49) = 2.72, p = 0.054).

Silicone oil tamponade was more frequently used in the open group than in the closed group with marginal significance (75.4% vs. 56.8%, 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).

A potential interaction (multiplicative effect) between smoking and inactive TB in the development of airflow limitation was identified, with marginal significance ( P = 0.054).

Additionally, marginal significance was found in physical functioning (PF, p=0.054) and in role physical (RP, p=0.060).

A similar pattern was observed for the left caudate, but the negative associations in both male and female participants reached only a marginal significance level ( P = 0.054 or 0.055, respectively) (Fig. 2 ).

As evident from the table, the inhibition [(RT differences between incongruent and congruent trials)/congruent trials] of the Flanker task exhibited a negative correlation with general anxiety, albeit with marginal significance ( r =-.292, p =.054), which suggests that weaker ability of inhibition (higher score) is associated with lower anxiety.

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.

Cox regression analysis identified lymph node metastasis as the only independent risk factor for reduced PFS (p = 0.004), with MLH1/PMS2 loss showing marginal significance (p = 0.054) [ 7 ].

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).

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

However, we noticed that the MDA concentrations were lower in PCOS patients with the dominant genotype of VDR-TaqI than in PCOS patients carrying the TT genotype, but the observed difference had marginal significance ( p = 0.054).

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

Body weight showed marginal significance ( p = 0.054), indicating a potential but inconclusive trend.

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 ).

On the other hand, there was no reduction in total bacterial load over time, but there was a marginal significance (p = 0.054).

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 ).