Table 4. Association between... | American Society of Hematology

Table 4.

Association between intervention engagement and pain interference outcomes

Intervention	Pain interference (PROMIS-8a T-score) mean change to 6 months							Estimate (95% CI)∗
Intervention	0 completed	10% completed	25% completed	50% completed	75% completed	90% completed	100% completed	Estimate (95% CI)∗
Proportion of HC sessions within 3 months of enrollment	−1.65	−1.89	−2.26	−2.87	−3.48	−3.85	−4.10	−0.024 (−0.059 to 0.010) P = .17
Proportion of chatbot lessons completed	−1.83	−1.96	−2.15	−2.46	−2.78	−2.96	−3.09	−0.013 (−0.037 to 0.012) P = .31
Mean of proportion of HC sessions and chatbot lessons completed	−1.51	−1.74	−2.09	−2.68	−3.27	−3.62	−3.85	−0.023 (−0.057 to 0.010) P = .17

Intervention	Pain interference (PROMIS-8a T-score) mean change to 6 months							Estimate (95% CI)∗
Intervention	0 completed	10% completed	25% completed	50% completed	75% completed	90% completed	100% completed	Estimate (95% CI)∗
Proportion of HC sessions within 3 months of enrollment	−1.65	−1.89	−2.26	−2.87	−3.48	−3.85	−4.10	−0.024 (−0.059 to 0.010) P = .17
Proportion of chatbot lessons completed	−1.83	−1.96	−2.15	−2.46	−2.78	−2.96	−3.09	−0.013 (−0.037 to 0.012) P = .31
Mean of proportion of HC sessions and chatbot lessons completed	−1.51	−1.74	−2.09	−2.68	−3.27	−3.62	−3.85	−0.023 (−0.057 to 0.010) P = .17

For each % increase in intervention completed, estimated decline in pain interference at 6 months.