. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2012 Jan 1.

Published in final edited form as: J Child Adolesc Subst Abuse. 2011 Jan 1;20(4):289–313. doi: 10.1080/1067828X.2011.581974

Table 3.

Logistic Random Intercept Model of Cannabis Abstinence Regressed on Therapist Adherence

	Separate CM component analysis		Combined CM component analysis

	OR^a	95% CI	OR	95% CI
Unadjusted
Monitoring	4.35	(1.70, 11.14)	2.61	(1.08, 6.31)
Cognitive Behavior	4.95	(1.86, 13.20)	2.94	(1.17, 7.40)
Adjusted for confounders^b
Monitoring	2.41	(1.06, 5.49)	2.14	(0.92, 4.97)
Cognitive Behavior	1.95	(0.82, 4.63)	1.45	(0.62, 3.36)

Estimates express odds of cannabis abstinence per unit increase in therapist adherence, before and after adjustment for putative confounders.

Sex of youth, sex of therapist, treatment history, number of sessions, therapist experience, therapist education and month of therapy were entered as confounders.