. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2010 Jul 2.

Published in final edited form as: Subst Use Misuse. 2009;44(2):253–281. doi: 10.1080/10826080802347677

Table 8.

RAP Intervention in Personal Networks^a

	PHAs (F=95)	CRs (F=142)	Others (F=89) ^b	Total (F=326) ^c
# of PHAs named in network at follow-up (mean)	(.885)	(1.345)	(1.048)	(1.110)^*
# of CRs named in network at follow-up (mean)	(.207)	(.147)	(.383)	(.219)^*
% of network members gave information to	72.3	32.8	21.2	40.6^**
% of network members gave demonstration/materials to	66.9	19.3	10.3	29.9^**
% of network members received information from	26.3	36.0	38.7	33.4^*
% of network members received demo/materials from	18.9	34.4	29.1	27.7^*
% of network members received prevention from in primary drug use site	33.1	39.4	27.8	33.8

Significance is indicated for comparisons between groups.

Includes CRs of all untrained PHAs (i.e., received 0–4 training sessions) and PHAs who attended no training sessions. PHAs who attended 1–4 sessions are excluded.

PHAs who attended only 1–4 sessions were included in the follow-up total.

p < .05;

^**

p < .001