Table 3.
Differences in daily hours worn and attrition status by qualitative category endorsement (codes for “device does not look good” and “helped become aware of distress” were not included in these analyses because of low frequency of endorsement).
| Category | Hours worn | Attrition | ||||||
| Endorsed, mean (SD) | Did not endorse, mean (SD) | t testa | P value | Did not drop out, n (%) | Dropped out, n (%) | χ2 value (df) | P value | |
| Discomfort/uncomfortable in general | 14.05 (6.98) | 15.96 (5.49) | 0.88 | .39 | 19 (45) | 4 (57) | 0.35 (1) | .55 |
| Discomfort sleeping/at night | 16.19 (5.25) | 15.01 (6.32) | −0.42 | .69 | 5 (12) | 0 (0) | 0.98 (1) | .32 |
| EDAb sensors were uncomfortable | 11.28 (9.55) | 15.5 (5.83) | 0.75 | .52 | 2 (5) | 1 (14) | 0.86 (1) | .35 |
| The monitor was too big/clunky | 16.37 (4.73) | 14.41 (6.85) | −1.00 | .32 | 16 (37) | 2 (29) | 0.21 (1) | .65 |
| The material was uncomfortable | 11.03 (8.13) | 15.83 (5.64) | 1.27 | .26 | 5 (12) | 2 (29) | 1.21 (1) | .27 |
| It should have a clock | 15.99 (5.40) | 14.85 (6.46) | −0.52 | .61 | 10 (22) | 2 (29) | 0.12 (1) | .73 |
| Felt OK when wearing monitor | 15.70 (5.49) | 13.75 (7.70) | −0.73 | .48 | 33 (78) | 4 (57) | 1.30 (1) | .25 |
| Could tolerate negatives | 17.90 (1.83) | 14.79 (6.43) | −2.11 | .05 | 5 (13) | 0 (0) | 0.98 (1) | .32 |
| Something positive about monitor’s looks | 14.07 (4.40) | 15.28 (6.38) | 0.49 | .64 | 4 (10) | 1 (14) | 0.12 (1) | .73 |
| Liked expressing distress | 12.13 (8.75) | 15.64 (5.65) | 0.87 | .43 | 5 (13) | 2 (29) | 1.21 (1) | .27 |
| Liked helping in a research study | 16.32 (5.46) | 13.14 (6.93) | −1.41 | .17 | 25 (58) | 5 (71) | 0.48 (1) | .49 |
aAll values have 1 degree of freedom (df).
bEDA: electrodermal activity.