Effect size (Cohen's d) was also determined from the mean severity ratings and standard deviation of the side effects observed in the placebo and active conditions.
Mean severity scores and antibody levels were compared using Student's t test.
Predicted mean severity levels (and 95% CI) for different combinations of Likert scale levels of the three descriptors are shown in table 7. Relationships between actual mean overall assessments of severity (VAS) and means predicted by the model are shown in figure 4. When individual assessments were compared with predicted values, the pR was 0.78.
At baseline, mean MDASI symptom severity (13-item summary) and interference scores (6-item summary) were similar among treatment arms (mean severity scores, 1.75, 2.09, and 1.80 and mean interference scores, 2.36, 2.97, and 2.64 in arms I, II, and III, respectively).
Table 6 shows the mean severity of complaint and functional ratings at presentation.
Overall, the mean severity (4.17, 4.2, and 4.6, respectively) for skin problems in each treatment group showed minimal variation.
Ninety-six percent of the ADEs were classified as category E, whereas only 4% of ADEs were classified as category F. The mean severity of illness and nursing workload scores were significant higher on nursing days when an ADE occurred (P < 0.001 and P = 0.002, respectively).
Test-retest reliability was excellent for number of days of nausea and vomiting and mean severity of nausea.
In the case of the NVSA,© however, the anchor-based estimates were smaller than the distribution-based estimates for number of days with nausea and vomiting and mean severity of nausea.
