Table 2.
Model 1 | Odds Ratio | 95% CI |
---|---|---|
Treatment Group | ||
ST* | - | - |
CDT | 0.842 | 0.547 – 1.297 |
Model 2 | Odds Ratio | 95% CI |
---|---|---|
Treatment Group | ||
ST* | - | - |
CDT | 0.891 | 0.571 – 1.391 |
Age, years | 1.001 | 0.978 – 1.025 |
Race/Ethnicity | ||
White* | - | - |
Other | 0.841 | 0.489 – 1.446 |
Gender | ||
Male* | - | - |
Female | 0.872 | 0.551 – 1.380 |
Marital Status | ||
Married | 1.082 | 0.674 – 1.737 |
Not Married* | - | - |
Education | ||
≤ High School/GED* | - | - |
Tech/Voc/Some college | 1.073 | 0.633 – 1.818 |
≥ College degree | 2.069 | 0.816 5.247 |
Cigarettes per day | 0.970 | 0.946 – 0.994 |
Note:
Reference group for calculating/testing the Odds Ratio. Both Model 1 and Model 2 were additionally adjusted for study site and time. ST = Standard Treatment. CDT = Computer-Delivered Treatment. With a planned sample size of 150 per group, the study had 80% power to detect an abstinence difference of 25% versus 40% between the ST and CDT groups at 12 months using a two-sided chi-squared test at a significance level of 0.05 (with intraclass correlation =1). This represented a worst case scenario, as the present analysis was longitudinal in nature and incorporated 4 follow-up time points (Week 1, and Months 1, 6, and 12 post-target quit date).