In this study also no significant differences in experience of care coordination, distress, or HRQoL between groups were achieved [ 45].
Comparisons between groups were achieved by Student's t-test or the Mann-Whitney test depending on the distribution of the variables.
Comparisons between groups were achieved using the Cox-proportional hazard model adjusted for sex, age, HbA1c level (NGSP), use or non-use of anti-hypertensive drugs, and use or non-use of anti-dyslipidemia drugs.
If the difference became less than 0.1, which was considered to be a negligible difference in a covariate between two groups on average [ 32, 33], we concluded that the desired covariate balance between two groups was achieved, and therefore matching was effective (data not shown).
The matching process was successful in achieving well-balanced study groups, and balance between the two study groups was achieved across IRP genotype subgroups (IRP+, IRP−), thus minimizing confounding of any biomarker effects (IRP*treatment interaction) by baseline differences.
Very good discrimination within cancer groups and between cancer and control groups was achieved.
They continued this random recruitment until all quotas were achieved, and an equal balance between the aforementioned stratification groups was achieved.
The D'Agostino-Pearson test indicated deviation from normality in the distribution of data; thus similarity between pharmacokinetic profiles by groups was achieved by the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney U test.
However, no statistically significant differences between the groups were achieved at any of the time points even as indicated by the overlapping 95% confidence intervals though the supervised NW group consistently reported the largest average improvement.
Statistical analyses were performed using non-normalized data, and pair-wise comparisons between treatment groups were achieved using Student's t-test or Mann–Whitney Rank Sum Test method for unequal variances.
