Rate of speech

The rate of errors in car seat installation and use was 33% less in the intervention group than in the control group (error ratio of 0.67).

Effect: improvement; ratio of 0.67 (33% fewer errors)

The rate of errors in car seat installation and use was 33% less in the intervention group than in the control group (error ratio of 0.67).

Effect: improvement; ratio of 0.67 (33% fewer errors)

The rate of errors in car seat installation and use was 33% less in the intervention group than in the control group (error ratio of 0.67).

Effect: improvement; ratio of 0.67 (33% fewer errors)

The rate of errors in car seat installation and use was 33% less in the intervention group than in the control group (error ratio of 0.67).

Effect: improvement; ratio of 0.67 (33% fewer errors)

The rate of errors in car seat installation and use was 33% less in the intervention group than in the control group (error ratio of 0.67).

Effect: improvement; ratio of 0.67 (33% fewer errors)

The rate of errors in car seat installation and use was 33% less in the intervention group than in the control group (error ratio of 0.67).

Effect: improvement; ratio of 0.67 (33% fewer errors)

The rate of errors in car seat installation and use was 33% less in the intervention group than in the control group (error ratio of 0.67).

Effect: improvement; ratio of 0.67 (33% fewer errors)

The rate of errors in car seat installation and use was 33% less in the intervention group than in the control group (error ratio of 0.67).

Effect: improvement; ratio of 0.67 (33% fewer errors)

The rate of errors in car seat installation and use was 33% less in the intervention group than in the control group (error ratio of 0.67).

Effect: improvement; ratio of 0.67 (33% fewer errors)

The rate of errors in car seat installation and use was 33% less in the intervention group than in the control group (error ratio of 0.67).

Effect: improvement; ratio of 0.67 (33% fewer errors)

The rate of errors in car seat installation and use was 33% less in the intervention group than in the control group (error ratio of 0.67).

Effect: improvement; ratio of 0.67 (33% fewer errors)

The rate of errors in car seat installation and use was 33% less in the intervention group than in the control group (error ratio of 0.67).

Effect: improvement; ratio of 0.67 (33% fewer errors)

The rate of errors in car seat installation and use was 33% less in the intervention group than in the control group (error ratio of 0.67).

Effect: improvement; ratio of 0.67 (33% fewer errors)

The rate of errors in car seat installation and use was 33% less in the intervention group than in the control group (error ratio of 0.67).

Effect: improvement; ratio of 0.67 (33% fewer errors)

The rate of errors in car seat installation and use was 33% less in the intervention group than in the control group (error ratio of 0.67).

Effect: improvement; ratio of 0.67 (33% fewer errors)

The rate of errors in car seat installation and use was 33% less in the intervention group than in the control group (error ratio of 0.67).

Effect: improvement; ratio of 0.67 (33% fewer errors)

The rate of errors in car seat installation and use was 33% less in the intervention group than in the control group (error ratio of 0.67).

Effect: improvement; ratio of 0.67 (33% fewer errors)

The rate of errors in car seat installation and use was 33% less in the intervention group than in the control group (error ratio of 0.67).

Effect: improvement; ratio of 0.67 (33% fewer errors)

The rate of errors in car seat installation and use was 33% less in the intervention group than in the control group (error ratio of 0.67).

Effect: improvement; ratio of 0.67 (33% fewer errors)

The rate of errors in car seat installation and use was 33% less in the intervention group than in the control group (error ratio of 0.67).

Effect: improvement; ratio of 0.67 (33% fewer errors)

The rate of errors in car seat installation and use was 33% less in the intervention group than in the control group (error ratio of 0.67).

Effect: improvement; ratio of 0.67 (33% fewer errors)

The rate of errors in car seat installation and use was 33% less in the intervention group than in the control group (error ratio of 0.67).

Effect: improvement; ratio of 0.67 (33% fewer errors)

The rate of errors in car seat installation and use was 33% less in the intervention group than in the control group (error ratio of 0.67).

Effect: improvement; ratio of 0.67 (33% fewer errors)

The rate of errors in car seat installation and use was 33% less in the intervention group than in the control group (error ratio of 0.67).

Effect: improvement; ratio of 0.67 (33% fewer errors)

The rate of errors in car seat installation and use was 33% less in the intervention group than in the control group (error ratio of 0.67).

Effect: improvement; ratio of 0.67 (33% fewer errors)

The rate of errors in car seat installation and use was 33% less in the intervention group than in the control group (error ratio of 0.67).

Effect: improvement; ratio of 0.67 (33% fewer errors)

The rate of errors in car seat installation and use was 33% less in the intervention group than in the control group (error ratio of 0.67).

Effect: improvement; ratio of 0.67 (33% fewer errors)

Among 111,631 men receiving new testosterone prescriptions, only 5.4% had androgen deficiency properly diagnosed by two low morning testosterone levels, 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked, nearl

Effect: adverse; Only 5.4% had proper diagnosis; 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked; ~13% had relative contraindications; 1.4% had absolute contraindica

Among 111,631 men receiving new testosterone prescriptions, only 5.4% had androgen deficiency properly diagnosed by two low morning testosterone levels, 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked, nearl

Effect: adverse; Only 5.4% had proper diagnosis; 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked; ~13% had relative contraindications; 1.4% had absolute contraindica

Among 111,631 men receiving new testosterone prescriptions, only 5.4% had androgen deficiency properly diagnosed by two low morning testosterone levels, 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked, nearl

Effect: adverse; Only 5.4% had proper diagnosis; 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked; ~13% had relative contraindications; 1.4% had absolute contraindica

Among 111,631 men receiving new testosterone prescriptions, only 5.4% had androgen deficiency properly diagnosed by two low morning testosterone levels, 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked, nearl

Effect: adverse; Only 5.4% had proper diagnosis; 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked; ~13% had relative contraindications; 1.4% had absolute contraindica

Among 111,631 men receiving new testosterone prescriptions, only 5.4% had androgen deficiency properly diagnosed by two low morning testosterone levels, 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked, nearl

Effect: adverse; Only 5.4% had proper diagnosis; 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked; ~13% had relative contraindications; 1.4% had absolute contraindica

Among 111,631 men receiving new testosterone prescriptions, only 5.4% had androgen deficiency properly diagnosed by two low morning testosterone levels, 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked, nearl

Effect: adverse; Only 5.4% had proper diagnosis; 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked; ~13% had relative contraindications; 1.4% had absolute contraindica

Among 111,631 men receiving new testosterone prescriptions, only 5.4% had androgen deficiency properly diagnosed by two low morning testosterone levels, 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked, nearl

Effect: adverse; Only 5.4% had proper diagnosis; 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked; ~13% had relative contraindications; 1.4% had absolute contraindica

Among 111,631 men receiving new testosterone prescriptions, only 5.4% had androgen deficiency properly diagnosed by two low morning testosterone levels, 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked, nearl

Effect: adverse; Only 5.4% had proper diagnosis; 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked; ~13% had relative contraindications; 1.4% had absolute contraindica

Among 111,631 men receiving new testosterone prescriptions, only 5.4% had androgen deficiency properly diagnosed by two low morning testosterone levels, 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked, nearl

Effect: adverse; Only 5.4% had proper diagnosis; 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked; ~13% had relative contraindications; 1.4% had absolute contraindica

Among 111,631 men receiving new testosterone prescriptions, only 5.4% had androgen deficiency properly diagnosed by two low morning testosterone levels, 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked, nearl

Effect: adverse; Only 5.4% had proper diagnosis; 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked; ~13% had relative contraindications; 1.4% had absolute contraindica

Among 111,631 men receiving new testosterone prescriptions, only 5.4% had androgen deficiency properly diagnosed by two low morning testosterone levels, 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked, nearl

Effect: adverse; Only 5.4% had proper diagnosis; 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked; ~13% had relative contraindications; 1.4% had absolute contraindica

Among 111,631 men receiving new testosterone prescriptions, only 5.4% had androgen deficiency properly diagnosed by two low morning testosterone levels, 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked, nearl

Effect: adverse; Only 5.4% had proper diagnosis; 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked; ~13% had relative contraindications; 1.4% had absolute contraindica

Among 111,631 men receiving new testosterone prescriptions, only 5.4% had androgen deficiency properly diagnosed by two low morning testosterone levels, 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked, nearl

Effect: adverse; Only 5.4% had proper diagnosis; 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked; ~13% had relative contraindications; 1.4% had absolute contraindica

Among 111,631 men receiving new testosterone prescriptions, only 5.4% had androgen deficiency properly diagnosed by two low morning testosterone levels, 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked, nearl

Effect: adverse; Only 5.4% had proper diagnosis; 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked; ~13% had relative contraindications; 1.4% had absolute contraindica

Among 111,631 men receiving new testosterone prescriptions, only 5.4% had androgen deficiency properly diagnosed by two low morning testosterone levels, 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked, nearl

Effect: adverse; Only 5.4% had proper diagnosis; 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked; ~13% had relative contraindications; 1.4% had absolute contraindica

Among 111,631 men receiving new testosterone prescriptions, only 5.4% had androgen deficiency properly diagnosed by two low morning testosterone levels, 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked, nearl

Effect: adverse; Only 5.4% had proper diagnosis; 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked; ~13% had relative contraindications; 1.4% had absolute contraindica

Among 111,631 men receiving new testosterone prescriptions, only 5.4% had androgen deficiency properly diagnosed by two low morning testosterone levels, 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked, nearl

Effect: adverse; Only 5.4% had proper diagnosis; 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked; ~13% had relative contraindications; 1.4% had absolute contraindica

Among 111,631 men receiving new testosterone prescriptions, only 5.4% had androgen deficiency properly diagnosed by two low morning testosterone levels, 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked, nearl

Effect: adverse; Only 5.4% had proper diagnosis; 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked; ~13% had relative contraindications; 1.4% had absolute contraindica

Among 111,631 men receiving new testosterone prescriptions, only 5.4% had androgen deficiency properly diagnosed by two low morning testosterone levels, 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked, nearl

Effect: adverse; Only 5.4% had proper diagnosis; 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked; ~13% had relative contraindications; 1.4% had absolute contraindica

Among 111,631 men receiving new testosterone prescriptions, only 5.4% had androgen deficiency properly diagnosed by two low morning testosterone levels, 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked, nearl

Effect: adverse; Only 5.4% had proper diagnosis; 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked; ~13% had relative contraindications; 1.4% had absolute contraindica

Among 111,631 men receiving new testosterone prescriptions, only 5.4% had androgen deficiency properly diagnosed by two low morning testosterone levels, 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked, nearl

Effect: adverse; Only 5.4% had proper diagnosis; 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked; ~13% had relative contraindications; 1.4% had absolute contraindica

Among 111,631 men receiving new testosterone prescriptions, only 5.4% had androgen deficiency properly diagnosed by two low morning testosterone levels, 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked, nearl

Effect: adverse; Only 5.4% had proper diagnosis; 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked; ~13% had relative contraindications; 1.4% had absolute contraindica

Among 111,631 men receiving new testosterone prescriptions, only 5.4% had androgen deficiency properly diagnosed by two low morning testosterone levels, 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked, nearl

Effect: adverse; Only 5.4% had proper diagnosis; 16.5% had no testosterone levels checked; ~13% had relative contraindications; 1.4% had absolute contraindica