Sentence examples for median harm from inspiring English sources

Percentage estimation error was calculated as 100 × 0.5 × median confidence interval width divided by median harm rate estimate.

The specialist assessment rate varied by method of harm; the median rate for self-cutting was 45% (IQR 28 63%) vs 58% (IQR 48 73%) for self-poisoning.

In consultations in which the patient initiated the discussion of a harm, a median of two more benefits/harms were addressed compared to consultations with more passive patients (median=8 vs 6, P<0.05).

For male students, the median number of experienced harms was 2, compared with 1 in female students (Table 2).

In the 230 reviews specifying specific harms, the median number of studies per review was 18 (range 1-209, interangetile range 16-29).

In the 92 reviews that aimed to assess specific harms, the median number of studies per review was 7 (range 0-75, interangetile range 3-12).

Overall, a median of seven benefits and harms were addressed per consultation (range, 2 13).

Hospitals which used published scales as a component of their risk assessments had a lower median rate of repeat self-harm at 6 months than hospitals which did not (median repeat rate (IQR): 18.5% (16.3, 20.8%) vs 22.7% (20.4, 25.2%), U=57.0, p=0.008).

These results suggest that cable median barriers are effective in minimizing harm.

Patients suffering from more than one diagnosis or self-harm alone had increased median LOS (6 vs. 4 days in the entire cohort, P >0.05).

We calculated the median (minimum, maximum) reported rate for each harm considered.