These demographic factors and the group (experimental vs control) were added into the repeated-measure analysis as the between-group factors. There were three repeated measure �Cat baseline (T1), at immediately post intervention (T2) and at 4 weeks after intervention (T3). The mean-differences between the experimental group and the control www.selleckchem.com/products/Y-27632.html group for cancer behavior coping was statistically significant at P<0.05. Means score for experiment group was higher than the mean scores of the control group. Repeated measures within the experimental group The multivariate analyses on the effect of the three repeated timings showed F (2, 144) = 7.25, partial eta-squared = 0.092, and a power of 93% [Table 3 and Figure 1]. Pair-wise comparison shows that the differences between baseline (T1) and follow-up (T3) (P=.

01) and between post-test (T2) and follow-up (T3) were both significant (P=.03) [Table 2]. Table 3 Estimate for the overall Cancer Behavior Inventory (CBI) Figure 1 Graphical comparison between Cancer Behavior Inventory of experimental and control group at different time points (T1: baseline, T2: post-test, T3: follow-up) DISCUSSION The significant favorable improvement on the cancer behavior self-efficacy measures of the women in the experimental group was immediate at post intervention and it continues even at 4 weeks after intervention. These improvements on the cancer behavior self-efficacy measures in the experimental group, correlates with the positive results of the fidelity check.

These matched results add to the confidence that the 4-week self-management intervention was effective in improving patient self�Cmanagement, which have a positive effect on the self efficacy of the women. In comparison, the cancer behavior self-efficacy scores of the control group showed deterioration in scores at baseline compared to post intervention. This shows that a woman’s perception of her skills and abilities to self manage/act effectively influences her actions and coping behaviors, the situations and environments she chooses, and finally her persistence in performing certain tasks.[1] Although a randomized controlled trial is the gold standard and the preferred design for a clinical trial, this trial adopts a quasi-experimental design; this was a nonrandomized study because it was logistically neither feasible nor ethical to conduct a randomized controlled trial in this scenario.

[22] The reasons being i) the possibility of contamination by diffusion, i.e., when the subjects in the control group learnt from those in the experimental group, either directly or indirectly; and ii) the AV-951 chemotherapy treatment was delivered over a duration of 4�C6 months, making it highly likely that the subjects would meet in the confined environment of the medical center.