. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Apr 1.

Published in final edited form as: J Subst Abuse Treat. 2013 Dec 21;46(4):429–438. doi: 10.1016/j.jsat.2013.12.007

Table 2.

Intervention effectiveness for indices of patient counseling attendance.

	Parameter	Estimate	SE	df	t	Wald Z	95% Confidence Interval
	Parameter	Estimate	SE	df	t	Wald Z	Lower Bound	Upper Bound
Model #1 Initiation	Estimates of Fixed Effect
	Intercept	1.723	.407		4.236^***		.921	2.525
	Temporal Period	.863	.346		2.497^*		.182	1.545
	Random Effect
	Residual	.088
	Counselor	.046	.167				.000	61.289
Model #2 Continuity	Estimates of Fixed Effect
	Intercept	3.913	.249	30.215	15.741^***		3.405	4.420
	Temporal Period	1.284	.335	157.613	3.838^***		.623	1.946
	Random Effect
	Residual	5.819	.589			9.874^***	4.771	7.100
	Counselor	.091	.228			.397	.001	12.586
Model #3 Aggregate Rate	Estimates of Fixed Effect
	Intercept	.811	.033	35.868	24.781^***		.745	.877
	Temporal Period	.133	.042	188.340	3.165^**		.050	.216
	Random Effect
	Residual	.088	.009			9.935^***	.072	.107
	Counselor	.003	.004			.864	.000	.033

Table Notes: Initiation was a binary outcome reflecting whether the 1st scheduled visit was attended, and was tested via a generalized linear mixed model (#1); Continuity was a continuous outcome reflecting the longest duration of consecutive weekly visits attended, and was tested via a linear mixed model (#2); Aggregate rate was a continuous outcome reflecting overall percentage of scheduled visits attended, and was tested via linear mixed model (#3); Client sample sizes were 106 during the historical control period, and 111 during the trial CM implementation period.

^***

p < .001.

^**

p < .01.

p < .05.