Table 3.
Parameter estimates of best fitting model of the intervention effect on clinic prevalence levels using weighted censored regressions
| Outcome | EST | SE | t | df | p | n at upper bound† |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Predictor | ||||||
| Before today, ever heard (specifically) about Hepatitis C | 133 | |||||
| intercept | 0.92 | 0.01 | 173.47 | 1 | <.0001 | |
| delayed | 0.09 | 0.01 | 9.25 | 1 | <.0001 | |
| Sigma | 0.08 | 0.00 | 22.72 | 1 | <.0001 | |
| Talked with Medical Provider about Hepatitis C | 63 | |||||
| intercept | 0.39 | 0.04 | 10.59 | 1 | <.0001 | |
| time | −0.01 | 0.00 | −4.52 | 1 | <.0001 | |
| intervention | 0.28 | 0.03 | 8.23 | 1 | <.0001 | |
| intervention*time | 0.01 | 0.00 | 3.91 | 1 | <.0001 | |
| prevalence of IV drug use | 0.84 | 0.07 | 12.77 | 1 | <.0001 | |
| prevalence of having a sex partner | 0.28 | 0.11 | 2.48 | 1 | 0.013 | |
| Sigma | 0.13 | 0.01 | 24.80 | 1 | <.0001 | |
| Got tested for Hepatitis C | 67 | |||||
| intercept | 0.73 | 0.01 | 49.81 | 1 | <.0001 | |
| prevalence of IV drug use | 0.66 | 0.06 | 10.28 | 1 | <.0001 | |
| Sigma | 0.12 | 0.01 | 22.95 | 1 | <.0001 | |
| Knows Hepatitis C Status | 44 | |||||
| intercept | 0.64 | 0.04 | 16.61 | 1 | <.0001 | |
| time | −0.01 | 0.00 | −2.37 | 1 | 0.0176 | |
| intervention | 0.02 | 0.04 | 0.63 | 1 | 0.525 | |
| intervention*time | 0.01 | 0.00 | 2.36 | 1 | 0.018 | |
| prevalence of IV drug use | 0.63 | 0.07 | 9.50 | 1 | <.0001 | |
| Sigma | 0.13 | 0.01 | 23.93 | 1 | <.0001 |
Note:
†
total number of patients included in biweekly intervals with a prevalence of 100%; covariates only tested for inclusion if significant on the patient-level