approaching significancep = 0.06
However, it is worth noting that self-reported TST was approaching significance in favour of the intervention group ( p = 0.06).
However, it is worth noting that self-reported TST was approaching significance in favour of the intervention group ( p = 0.06).
Our analyses suggest that the differences between the two groups for TST and TIB resulted from an increasing trend in the intervention group and a decreasing trend in the control group over time – the estimated slope of time trend equals 0.39, 95% CI: −0.55, 1.34 for TST of intervention group; −0.53, 95% CI: −1.43, 0.37 for TST of control group (group B); 0.36, 95% CI: −0.72, 1.43 for TIB of intervention group; −0.342, 95% CI: −1.37, 0.68 for TIB of control group).
Our analyses suggest that the differences between the two groups for TST and TIB resulted from an increasing trend in the intervention group and a decreasing trend in the control group over time – the estimated slope of time trend equals 0.39, 95% CI: −0.55, 1.34 for TST of intervention group; −0.53, 95% CI: −1.43, 0.37 for TST of control group (group B); 0.36, 95% CI: −0.72, 1.43 for TIB of intervention group; −0.342, 95% CI: −1.37, 0.68 for TIB of control group).