Our primary analyses were, however, intention-to-treat analyses based on the randomization groups.
To date, the majority of published data assessing such molecular techniques are derived from primary tumour analyses; however, studies assessing the suitability of EGFR testing in metastatic tissues are considerably less extensive.
However the primary analyses are adjusted, there is no suggestion of an added benefit of speech and language therapy intervention over and above the control social contact.
However, since the primary analyses showed no effect and this method is highly conservative (in fact some p-values would have exceeded 1), we chose not to use this correction.
We performed our primary analyses only on studies with uniform BMI cut-offs (narrow criteria) in order to reduce between-studies heterogeneity; however, those analyses may have excluded too many studies; therefore, we performed additional analyses with broad inclusion criteria.
However, the results from these sensitivity analyses did not differ from the results of the primary analyses.
However, omitting the subcategory 'Only at parties' from the analyses resulted in similar results as the primary analyses.
Y.L. performed the primary analyses.
A.R.P. conducted the primary analyses and supporting analyses.
We considered complete abortion rate for our primary analyses.
