Table 3.

Relationships between candidate predictors and CBT use scores ^a

	SR (n = 100)		DO (n = 100)		SR vs. DO
	b (SE)	p	b (SE)	p	p b
Max CBT Score
Participated in initiativec	-0.27 (0.33)	0.42	-0.27 (0.43)	0.54	> 0.99
Years of experience	0.01 (0.02)	0.43	-0.06 (0.02)	< 0.01*	< 0.01
Caseload	-0.03 (0.01)	< 0.01*	-0.01 (0.02)	0.57	0.23
Independent contractord, e	0.56 (0.31)	0.08	-0.23 (0.44)	0.61	0.14
Mean CBT Score
Participated in initiativec	<-0.01 (0.23)	0.98	-0.11 (0.24)	0.66	0.76
Years of experience	0.2 (0.01)	0.04*	-0.03 (0.01)	< 0.01*	< 0.01
Caseload	-0.02 (0.01)	0.04*	<-0.01 (0.01)	0.91	0.18
Independent contractord, e	0.42 (0.21)	0.06	-0.26 (0.24)	0.27	0.03
Count CBT Score
Participated in initiativec	0.65 (0.84)	0.44	-0.27 (0.41)	0.51	0.32
Years of experience	0.12 (0.03)	< 0.01*	-0.05 (0.02)	0.01*	< 0.01
Caseload	0.01 (0.03)	0.84	< 0.01 (0.02)	0.85	0.92
Independent contractord, e	1.23 (0.78)	0.12	-0.63 (0.45)	0.17	0.04

Abbreviations SR, Self-Report (measured by the TPOCS-SeRTIFY); DO, Direct Observation (measured by the TPOCS-RS); ^aCoefficients are derived from three-level (client, clinician, agency) regression models with random intercepts using each CBT score as a dependent variable and each candidate predictor as an independent variable; models were run separately for SR and DO scores; ^bTwo-tailed p value by z-test comparing self-report coefficient from DO coefficient; *p < 0.05, indicating a statistically significant relationship between predictor and CBT use score; ^cThis variable was coded as yes = 1 and no = 0; ^dThis variable was coded as independent contractor = 1 and salaried = 0; ^en=98 as one clinician (with two client sessions included in analyses) did not provide a response