Table 1.
Participants in the different groups and analyses
| Initial phase characteristics | iACTface group (n = 81) | iACT group (n= 80) | Control group (n= 82) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Participants in the intention-to-treat analyses N (%) | |||
| Female | 44 (54.3) | 37 (46.3) | 38 (46.3) |
| Male | 37 (45.7) | 43 (53.7) | 44 (53.7) |
| Poor academic skills N (%) | |||
| Normally developing academic skills | 41 (50.6) | 40 (50.0) | 40 (48.8) |
| Poor academic skills | 40 (49.4) | 40 (50.0) | 42 (51.2) |
| Reason for poor academic skills N (%) | |||
| Unknown reason for poor academic skills | 18 (22.2) | 16 (20.0) | 18 (22.0) |
| Reading problems | 9 (11.1) | 11 (13.8) | 11 (13.4) |
| Math problems | 7 (8.6) | 7 (8.8) | 8 (9.8) |
| Both reading and math problems | 6 (7.4) | 6 (7.5) | 5 (6.1) |
| Participants in the per-protocol analyses N (% from the intention-to-treat protocol) | |||
| 64 (79.0) | 58 (72.5) | 82 (100) | |
| Included/excluded cases (N) in the per-protocol analyses | |||
| Female | 39/5 | 33/4 | 38/0 |
| Male | 25/12 | 27/17 | 4/0 |
Two different analytical protocols (intention-to-treat and per-protocol) were used, as recommended for intervention studies (Ranganathan et al. 2016)