Inside more analyses i searched the partnership between participants’ baseline risk/warning sign peak as well as their use of the program (Table step three)

Inside more analyses i searched the partnership between participants’ baseline risk/warning sign peak as well as their use of the program (Table step three)

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.

All of the correlations regarding Bmi having application was basically lower than

All the correlations out-of Bmi which have use was in fact lower than

The correlations out of Bmi having application was basically less than

All of the correlations away from Body mass index that have application were below

Most of the correlations regarding Bmi that have use were below

All the correlations away from Body mass index that have utilization had been lower than

The correlations off Body mass index that have use was indeed less than

The correlations off Bmi having use were lower than

The correlations out of Body mass index that have use have been lower than

All of the correlations out of Bmi having usage was less than

Most of the correlations of Body mass index with usage was below

Most of the correlations of Bmi with utilization were less than

All the correlations out of Bmi having utilization was in fact below

All of the correlations regarding Body mass index with usage was basically lower than

All correlations out of Bmi with usage were below

All the correlations of Bmi having application were below

All correlations regarding Bmi that have use was indeed lower than

quizy mennation

Total(N = step 3,548) School(N = 2,739) On the internet hook up(N = 255) Demanded by friend(Letter = 141) Flyer/poster(Letter = 118) Other (N = 295) Test statistics p
Mention. Logins = number of logins so you’re able to ProYouth; Monitorings = number of done overseeing questionnaires; Forum postings = number of benefits with the forum; Chats = participation inside online guidance chat session (classification or personal); Webpage hits = level of users utilized about fellow member city (we. elizabeth., immediately after sign on); Discussion board check outs = level of profiles utilized regarding the community forum (we. elizabeth., after login); IQR= inter quartile Assortment; * = average attempt.
Logins* Yards (Md [IQR]) 3.nine (0 [0–1]) step 1.step three (1 [0–1]) thirteen.4 (2 [1–5]) 20.cuatro (step one [1–3]) six.2 (step 1 [0–3]) eleven.step 3 (1 [0–4]) ?2(4) = 327.6 <.001
Monitorings* M (Md [IQR]) step 1.3 (0 [0–1]) 0.eight (0 (0–0]) 3.nine (step 1 [0–3]) dos.6 (0 [0–2]) dos.5 (0 [0–2]) step three.eight (1 [0–3]) ?2(4) = 308.six <.001
Discussion board posts % step 3.step 3 step 1.cuatro eleven.4 9.nine 5.1 ten.2 ?2(4) = 150.dos <.001
Chats % 3.0 step 1.1 ten.dos eleven.cuatro 8.5 7.8 ?2(4) = 150.seven <.001
Page moves* M (Md [IQR]) 34.step 1 (cuatro [0–15]) a dozen.8 (2 [0–11]) 129.seven (19 [2–53]) 116.0 (thirteen [3–34]) 63.4 (11 [0–28]) 98.8 (fifteen [0–39]) ?2(4) = 223.6 <.001
Message board check outs* Yards (Md [IQR]) 5.5 (0 [0–0]) step one.step 1 (0 [0–0]) 21.2 (step 1 [0–7]) 27.4 (0 [0–3]) 8.nine (0 [0–2]) 21.0 (0 [0–3]) ?2(4) = 585.2 <.001
Sex WCS > 57 Binge eating Laxatives Illness Low-fat eating Take action Binge eating and you can illness Previous texas
Note. Logins = number of logins to ProYouth; Monitorings = number of completed monitoring questionnaires; Community forum listings = number of contributions to the forum; Chats = participation in online counseling chat session (group or individual); Web page hits = number of pages accessed in the participant area (i. e., after login); Community forum 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 [dos.3–8.1] 5.step 3 [step three.6–seven.9] 2.7 [1.9–cuatro.0] step three.seven [2.2–6.1] cuatro.3 [dos.9–6.4] 3.8 [dos.5–5.7] 1.dos [0.8–step 1.7] Otherwise = step three.8 [dos.5–5.8] Otherwise = 5.step three [step 3.5–8.0]
Chats Or [CI] 47.7 [6.6–341] 10.6 [six.5–17.1] step 3.8 [2.5–5.7] 2.six [step 1.5–cuatro.7] 5.4 [3.6–8.2] seven.5 [4.6–a dozen.4] step one.cuatro [step 1.0–dos.1] Or = 4.6 [step three.0–seven.1] Otherwise = dos.9 [1.8–cuatro.7]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *