28 sample size. And sham reduced capacity by half as much as the real thing increased it? Anyone got any comment on tbe conclusion as I am sceptical but can be persuaded maybe.
Unfortunately Iām in the same boat. What appears especially telling is:
> tVNS applied for 30 min daily over 7 consecutive days increased VO2peak by 1.04 mL/kg/min (*95% CI: .34ā1.73*; P = .005), compared with no change after sham stimulation (ā0.54 mL/kg/min; *95% CI: ā1.52 to .45*)
(emphasis mine) The 95% CIs for the case and control groups overlap. Seems borderline irresponsible to have a the abstract reporting a significant result.
> tVNS applied for 30 min daily over 7 consecutive days increased VO2peak by 1.04 mL/kg/min (*95% CI: .34ā1.73*; P = .005), compared with no change after sham stimulation (ā0.54 mL/kg/min; *95% CI: ā1.52 to .45*)
(emphasis mine) The 95% CIs for the case and control groups overlap. Seems borderline irresponsible to have a the abstract reporting a significant result.