Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Oct 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Hum Nutr Diet. 2013 Sep 20;27(5):413–425. doi: 10.1111/jhn.12158

TABLE 2.

Compliance with dietary counselling for subjects who completed 6 months of study. Data shown is mean and SD, or number and percent for subjects who completed 6 months.

Variable Healthy
Eating (n=46)
Mediterranean
(n=47)
P-valuea
Number of Counselling Calls 10.3, 0.6 10.6, 1.0 0.106
Total minutes counsellingb 212, 67 245, 45 0.008
Number of sessions to meet goalsc 5.2, 1.8 6.9, 2.2 <0.001
Record-Keepingd 81%, 22% 80%, 22% 0.883
Self-Efficacy score at baseline 31, 4 31, 3 0.802
Self-Efficacy score at 3 months 31, 3 31, 3 0.399
Percent of goals met at 6 months 88%, 23% 82%, 18% 0.159
Participants meeting ≥ 70% of goals at 6 months, number and percent 41, 89% 40, 85% 0.759
Participants meeting 100% of goals at 6 months, number and percent 31, 67% 15, 32%e 0.001
a

Differences between arms were analysed by two-sample t-tests or by Fisher’s Exact test for proportions.

b

The sum total of minutes spent on counselling calls over six months. This does not include the in-person study visits at baseline and 3 months.

c

This excludes one subject in the Mediterranean arm who never met all goals. Goal attainment was judged by the study dietitian from review of self-monitoring records.

d

The percentage of self-monitoring records that were kept and returned to the study dietitian.

e

Only 2 of the twenty-five subjects who did not meet all Mediterranean goals at 6 months had never met those goals at any point in time while on study.