Statistical analysis
bone mass loss, pain
DISEASE
The sample size was estimated based on another study with an estimated mean of 10.26, standard deviation (SD) of 13.81, two-sided alpha level of 0.05, statistical power of 80%, and an anticipated dropout rate of 25% [The participants had a supplementation compliance rate of ≥ 70% and did not deviate from the study protocol in a manner that would have led to their withdrawal from the study. The Kruskal–Wallis test was used to compare continuous variables (ie, WOMAC score, VAS pain score, grip strength, FFM, and bone mass) among groups. The chi-squared test was used to compare categorical variables (eg, sex and baseline characteristics) among groups. Changes in continuous variables from baseline to the study endpoint were analyzed using paired To investigate the effects of supplementation when minimal resistance training was performed, a subgroup analysis was also conducted with participants with poor resistance training compliance (average minutes spent training in the 10th percentile). Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and analysis of covariance using a repeated-measures mixed-effect model with the supplement × visits interaction included as a fixed effect factor was used to compare the difference in continuous efficacy endpoints among groups, with baseline values, sex, number of follow-up visits, and supplementation serving as covariates. Covariates were selected by identifying key physiological factors, such as differences in FFM and bone mass loss, in terms of sex and baseline values reflecting different disease severities, which may have influenced the measured outcomeStatistical analyses were performed using SAS version 9.4 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, United States) and GraphPad Prism version 5.0 (San Diego, California, United States). A 