Suggestions(1)
Exact(4)
A Routine Downloader was also considered to be a "Routine Reviewer" of data from a particular device if he or she retrospectively reviewed the data from that device at least "most of the time" he or she downloaded (given the choices of "Never," "Some of the time," "Most of the time," and "Every time I downloaded").
Linear regression was used to look for the association between being a Routine Reviewer of data from one or more devices with A1c, controlling for possible confounding factors.
Frequencies of downloading at least once in the past year, of being a "Routine Downloader," and of being a "Routine Reviewer" of data from each device were reported as proportions of all users of that device, based on self-report.
If a participant was a "Routine Reviewer" of data from one or more devices (BGM, pump, or CGM device), he or she was considered to be a "Routine Reviewer" of one or more devices in further analysis.
Similar(56)
Characteristics of adults and children of caregivers who were Routine Reviewers of data from one or more devices are shown in Table 2.
Overall, only 12% of adults and 27% of caregivers were Routine Reviewers of data from one or more devices (Fig. 1A and E).
Descriptive statistics (t tests for continuous variables and χ tests for dichotomous variables) were used to compare Routine Reviewers of data from one or more devices with those who were not Routine Reviewers.
Every data source is associated with documentation including following information: how and when chemical compounds were collected into a data source, links to the outside repositories, time-stamp of when a data source was created and updated, information about last update; a list of authors and reviewers of DSSTox data source and supporting literature.
Although unadjusted analysis showed that those who more frequently reviewed device data had lower mean A1c, we did not detect a significant association between those who were Routine Reviewers of their data and A1c after adjustment.
Older adults, and those adults who had diabetes longer, were more likely to be Routine Reviewers of device data.
Post hoc review masking was defined as the masking of patient identity and intervention to independent reviewers of clinical data after trial completion.
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