Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Lu, Cheng, and Chen (2013 ) faced one of the most common challenges encountered in longitudinal studies: follow-up attrition. Using a correlational prospective design, 464 volunteers completed a questionnaire that measured the constructs of the theory of planned behavior, and subsequently 154 of them provided physical activity data at a 6-month follow-up. The proportion of participants (66.8%) for whom the investigators were not able to gather information on the behavioral outcome at follow-up may reflect a form of selection bias that may affect both the validity and generalizability of study results. Lu, et al.'s (2013 ) study is used here to explore the implication of follow-up attrition on the results and inference, to review what information should be reported in a scientific paper in such situations, and to give practical tips to handle follow-up attrition.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.2466/03.PR0.115c19z5 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!