Table 6.

Statistical predictors of use of single fraction schedules

Case	Factor	OR for use of SF (95%CI)	P
Uncomplicated-spine
Hartsell Case 2 (1998, United States)	Respondents recommending doses < 30Gy:	NR	NR
	Longer time in practice
	Academic practice
	Practice in the Southwest
Chow Case 2 (Canada, 2000) Chow Case 3 (Canada, 2000)	No differences based on country of specialty training or year training completed	NR	NR
Fairchild Case 3	University practice	2.08 (1.35-3.19)	0.001
(Intl, 2009)	Private practice	0.27 (0.12-0.61)	0.002
	Trained in United States	0.17 (0.10-0.28)	< 0.001
	Practice in Aust/NZ	2.44 (1.43-4.18)	0.001
Roos Case 3 (Aust/NZ, 2000)	No difference based on trainees vs specialists, public vs private practice, years of experience, % workload palliative, between Aust vs NZ or between Aust states	NR	NR
Complicated-neuropathic pain
Fairchild Case 4	University practice	2.31 (1.33-4.00)	0.003
(Intl, 2009)	Trained in US	0.22 (0.11-0.43)	< 0.001
Roos Case 4 (Aust/NZ, 2000)	No difference based on trainees vs specialists, public vs private practice, years of experience, % workload palliative, between Aust vs NZ or between Aust states	NR	NR

Aust: Australia; Intl: International; NR: Not reported; NZ: New Zealand.