Inside the extra analyses i looked the partnership between participants’ standard exposure/symptom top and their use of the system (Table step 3)

Inside the extra analyses i looked the partnership between participants’ standard exposure/symptom top and their use of the system (Table step 3)

The results show that baseline characteristics were only loosely correlated with the number of logins, completed monitoring assessments, page hits, and forum visits, while stronger associations were found with the more intense parts of the intervention (forum posts and chat participations). In addition, age was correlated with utilization between rspearman=.17 (age ? logins) and rspearman=.25 (age ? forum visits; all p < .01). 1.

Most of the correlations of Bmi which have use was basically less than

The correlations of Body mass index with use was basically less than

All correlations away from Bmi that have application have been lower than

All of the correlations of Bmi which have usage were lower than

Most of the correlations regarding Body mass index that have utilization was indeed less than

All of the correlations of Body mass index that have usage was in fact lower than

Most of the correlations of Bmi that have utilization was basically less than

All of the correlations out of Body mass index which have use was indeed less than

Every correlations off Body mass index having use was below

All correlations out-of Body mass index that have usage was in fact less than

Every correlations off Bmi which have application had been less than

All the correlations away from Bmi which have usage was basically less than

Most of the correlations out-of Body mass index having utilization were lower than

Most of the correlations off Bmi that have use was lower than

All correlations of Bmi with application had been lower than

The correlations out-of Body mass index with application was indeed below

The correlations regarding Body mass index having usage were below

Total(N = 3,548) School(N = 2,739) On the internet connect(N = 255) Needed by friend(N = 141) Flyer/poster(Letter = 118) Other (Letter = 295) Decide to try analytics p
Mention. Logins = quantity of logins in order to ProYouth; Monitorings = amount of accomplished monitoring forms; Forum postings = level of efforts into the message board; Chats = contribution inside the on the internet counseling speak session (classification otherwise private); Page moves = amount of users accessed on new member city (we. elizabeth., once login); Discussion board check outs = amount of pages reached about forum (i. elizabeth., just after sign on); IQR= inter quartile Range; * = median try.
Logins* Yards (Md [IQR]) step three.9 (0 [0–1]) 1.3 (step 1 [0–1]) 13.4 (2 [1–5]) 20.4 (1 [1–3]) 6.2 (step 1 [0–3]) 11.3 (1 [0–4]) ?2(4) = 327.6 <.001
Monitorings* Yards (Md [IQR]) step 1.step 3 (0 [0–1]) 0.7 (0 (0–0]) 3.9 (step 1 [0–3]) 2.six (0 [0–2]) 2.5 (0 [0–2]) step three.eight (step 1 [0–3]) ?2(4) = millionairematch 308.six <.001
Forum postings % 3.3 1.4 eleven.cuatro 9.nine 5.step 1 ten.dos ?2(4) = 150.dos <.001
Chats % step 3.0 1.step one ten.2 11.4 8.5 eight.8 ?2(4) = 150.eight <.001
Web page moves* Meters (Md [IQR]) 34.1 (cuatro [0–15]) twelve.8 (2 [0–11]) 129.7 (19 [2–53]) 116.0 (13 [3–34]) 63.4 (eleven [0–28]) 98.8 (fifteen [0–39]) ?2(4) = 223.six <.001
Community forum visits* Meters (Md [IQR]) 5.5 (0 [0–0]) step 1.step one (0 [0–0]) 21.2 (1 [0–7]) twenty seven.cuatro (0 [0–3]) 8.9 (0 [0–2]) 21.0 (0 [0–3]) ?2(4) = 585.dos <.001
Intercourse WCS > 57 Bingeing Laxatives Nausea Low-calorie restaurants Do it Binge eating and illness Previous texas
Note. Logins = number of logins to ProYouth; Monitorings = number of completed monitoring questionnaires; Message board posts = number of contributions to the forum; Chats = participation in online counseling chat session (group or individual); Web page strikes = number of pages accessed in the participant area (i. e., after login); Discussion board check outs = number of pages accessed in the forum (i. e., after login); WCS = Weight Concerns Scale; tx = treatment; OR = odds ratio; rspearman = Spearman rank correlations; CI = confidence interval; **p <. 01.
Logins rspearman .18** .21** .13** .04** .14** .15** .00 .14** .14**
Monitorings rspearman .23** .22** .13** .07** .14** .17** .02 .17** .14**
Page hits rspearman .17** .21** .14** .05** .14** .14** .00 .14** .15**
Forum visits rspearman .18** .25** .17** .13** .20** .19** .01 .20** .23**
Forum posts Or [CI] cuatro.step three [2.3–8.1] 5.step three [step 3.6–7.9] dos.seven [step one.9–cuatro.0] step 3.seven [2.2–6.1] cuatro.step 3 [dos.9–six.4] step 3.8 [dos.5–5.7] step one.2 [0.8–step 1.7] Or = step three.8 [2.5–5.8] Or = 5.step 3 [step three.5–8.0]
Chats Otherwise [CI] 47.7 [6.6–341] ten.six [six.5–17.1] 3.8 [2.5–5.7] dos.6 [step 1.5–4.7] 5.4 [3.6–8.2] seven.5 [4.6–a dozen.4] step one.4 [step one.0–2.1] Or = cuatro.6 [step 3.0–eight.1] Or = dos.9 [1.8–4.7]
Share

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.