Table 4 |
||||
|
Presentation of the results of the primary analyses in a 2 × 2 factorial trial[3] |
||||
|
Decision Analysis n = 100 |
no Decision Analysis n = 112 |
Video/leaflet n = 104 |
no Video/leaflet n = 108 |
|
|
|
||||
|
Total Decisional Conflict, mean (SD) |
27.6 (12.1) |
38.9 (18.3) |
30.3 (13.4) |
36.8 (18.8) |
|
Adjusted difference1,2 (95% CI) |
-9.4 (-13.0 to -5.8)3 |
-4.2 (-7.8 to -0.6)3 |
||
|
p value |
< 0.001 |
0.021 |
||
|
|
||||
|
1 Adjusted for age, sex, decisional conflict at baseline, factorial design and general practice (all comparisons are for the intervention compared with its respective control) 2 Negative differences represent a favourable outcome for the relevant intervention 3 The interaction between the interventions was investigated as a secondary analysis and was found to be significant (interaction coefficient = 12 (95% CI 5 to 19), p = 0.001) |
||||
|
Montgomery et al. BMC Medical Research Methodology 2003 3:26 doi:10.1186/1471-2288-3-26 |
||||
