Skip to main content
. 2023 Nov;69(11):784–791. doi: 10.46747/cfp.6911784

Table 2.

Factors associated with fewer patient referrals to mental health professionals

FACTOR UNIVARIATE ANALYSIS
OR (95% CI), P VALUE
MODEL 1* (BIC=133.09)
OR (95% CI), P VALUE
MODEL 2* (BIC=124.32)
OR (95% CI), P VALUE
Asking Socratic questions 5.31 (1.59-17.72), P=.01 5.89 (1.32-26.25), P=.02 5.39 (1.27-22.84), P=.02
Providing summaries at consultation end 4.94 (1.74-14.07), P<.01 5.30 (1.40-20.08), P=.01 4.72 (1.37-16.32), P=.01
Participating in a supervised education group 2.60 (1.22-5.56), P=.01 1.09 (0.35-3.35), P=.88 1.06 (0.34-3.25), P=.92
Having fixed time for CBT 2.78 (1.21-6.37), P=.02 1.44 (0.45-4.58), P=.54 1.44 (0.46-4.47), P=.53
Participating in a refresher course 2.90 (1.34-6.26), P=.01 3.52 (1.04-11.86), P=.04 3.32 (1.01-10.95), P=.05
Having an office colleague who uses CBT 4.02 (1.42-11.35), P=.01 1.99 (0.50-7.89), P=.33 2.09 (0.56-7.89), P=.28
Having economic incentives 2.60 (1.10-6.13), P=.03 1.89 (0.54-6.67), P=.32 1.82 (0.53-6.30), P=.34
Providing psychoeducation 1.88 (0.71-4.95), P=.20 0.76 (0.21-2.81), P=.68 NA
Assigning homework 2.59 (0.81-8.24), P=.11 0.86 (0.16-4.49), P=.86 NA
Setting an agenda 0.75 (0.28-2.06), P=.58 NA NA
Using problem lists 1.12 (0.31-4.07), P=.86 NA NA
Reviewing homework 1.36 (0.30-6.13), P=.69 NA NA
Using the ABC model 1.30 (0.35-4.85), P=.69 NA NA
Assigning a daily activity log 1.33 (0.55-3.20), P=.52 NA NA
Discussing the panic cycle 0.97 (0.40-2.36), P=.94 NA NA
Using the anxiety curve 1.69 (0.66-4.29), P=.27 NA NA
Using a case formulation approach 0.60 (0.25-1.46), P=.26 NA NA
Evaluation 1.11 (0.46-2.70), P=.81 NA NA
Cooperating with local specialists 1.32 (0.54-3.21), P=.54 NA NA
Having patients experience positive effects 2.03 (0.61-6.72), P=.25 NA NA

ABC—Activating event, Belief, Consequence32; BIC—Bayesian information criteria; CBT—cognitive behavioural therapy; NA—not applicable; OR—odds ratio.

*

Models 1 and 2 are based on variables with P≤.20 and P≤.05, respectively, from the univariate analysis. Model 2 was chosen for the analysis because of its smaller BIC estimate.