1. Patient Carrying Time, Confidence, and Training with Epinephrine Autoinjectors: The RACE Survey 
Jay Portnoy, MD, Rolin L. Wade, MS, Catherine Kessler, PhD 
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice 
DOI: /j.jaip
Copyright © 2019 The Authors Terms and Conditions

2. Figure 1
Respondent disposition. ∗Reminder letters were also mailed to Auvi-Q patients (n = 5,128) to help achieve recruitment goal. †To avoid overenrollment, the online survey and call center became inactive once the targeted sample size (N = 1,000) was reached.
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice DOI: ( /j.jaip )
Copyright © 2019 The Authors Terms and Conditions

3. Figure 2
Likelihood of patients carrying Auvi-Q all the time during the last 7 days vs EpiPen. N value for children (n = 697) does not match the total population of children in the study (n = 702) because of the exclusion from the model of 5 children with missing age-group data. See Tables E4 to E6 for results on all model parameters.
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice DOI: ( /j.jaip )
Copyright © 2019 The Authors Terms and Conditions

4. Figure 3
Number of days the EAI was carried in the previous 7 days. LS, Least squares. N value for children (n = 697) does not match the total population of children in the study (n = 702) because of the exclusion of 5 children with missing age-group data.
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice DOI: ( /j.jaip )
Copyright © 2019 The Authors Terms and Conditions

5. Figure 4
Confidence in using Auvi-Q vs EpiPen correctly: “Very Confident.” See Tables E7 to E9 for results on all model parameters. ∗Responses shown for parent/guardian confidence about correctly using the EAI on their child.
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice DOI: ( /j.jaip )
Copyright © 2019 The Authors Terms and Conditions

6. Figure 5
Clarity of instructions and training for Auvi-Q vs EpiPen. N value for children (n = 697) does not match the total population of children in the study (n = 702) because of the exclusion from the model of 5 children with missing age-group data. See Tables E10 to E17 for results on all model parameters. ∗Model for finding trainer helpful on EAI use could not be fit because of the extremely low number of “No” responses in children.
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice DOI: ( /j.jaip )
Copyright © 2019 The Authors Terms and Conditions