Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(2)
Exact(1)
Attrition at one- and 15-year follow-ups was chosen to represent short-term and long-term attrition, respectively.
Similar(59)
Compared to baseline assessment, 20.1% (N = 149) of the respondents were lost to attrition at one-year follow-up.
The polychoric correlation between baseline temperamental sociability and attrition at one-year follow-up was of a small to medium effect size (r =.20).
Attrition rates at one month in these studies were of 36% patients and 49% caregivers, 69%and38%8% patient and caregiver dyads, respectively.
Specifically, there is an allowance for a 20% attrition at the one-year follow-up and 40% attrition at the time of the two-year follow-up, and proposing to recruit a total of 480 participants at baseline (thus, allowing for a possible 40% loss to follow-up at the two year time point).
A total of 55 participants were lost to follow-up, yielding an attrition rate of 39% at one year.
To detect a difference of 0.4 SD with 80% power using a two-sided 0.05 level two-group t-test, we will enroll 130 subjects in each group, to allow for an attrition rate of 30% at one year and a sample with outcome data of 100 patients in each group.
As Table 2 already has shown, selective attrition lead to the most biased results when attrition was more heavily dependent on variables at one time point than the other.
This happened when attrition was more heavily dependent on variables at one time point than the other.
When attrition was only directly dependent on variables at one time point (baseline predictor and baseline health) (MAR), results were fairly unbiased.
MR provided biased results when attrition was dependent on follow-up and baseline variables to quite substantial degrees, while results from change score analysis were biased when attrition was more strongly dependent on variables at one time point than the other.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com