Table 2.

Values for practice leaders’ relative commitment to improvement scores and implementation capability composite scores based on timing of initiation of DIAMOND depression care improvement

	Timing of initiation: waves of practices initiating improvement
	First	Second	Third	Fourth	Fifth	None	p c	R 2
	M (SD)	M (SD)	M (SD)	M (SD)	M (SD)	M (SD)
Practice leaders’ relative commitment scoresa	8.0	6.8	5.7	5.8	4.6	5.7	0.002	0.11
	(0.78)	(1.0)	(1.6)	(1.5)	(2.1)	(1.6)
Depression collaborative care features in placeb	0.33	0.25	0.26	0.28	0.13	0.24	0.30	0.01
	(0.15)	(0.13)	(0.20)	(0.17)	(0.11)	(0.16)
Advanced access and tracking capabilitiesb	0.58	0.59	0.58	0.60	0.44	0.58	0.69	0.00
	(0.16)	(0.15)	(0.19)	(0.14)	(0.15)	(0.15)
Depression culture and attitudesb	0.79	0.73	0.76	0.62	0.60	0.66	0.05	0.05
	(0.12)	(0.16)	(0.15)	(0.20)	(0.23)	(0.21)
Prior depression quality improvement activitiesb	0.50	0.28	0.37	0.34	0.15	0.28	0.03	0.06
	(0.14)	(0.14)	(0.20)	(0.18)	(0.13)	(0.16)
Quality improvement culture and attitudesb	0.76	0.76	0.73	0.72	0.63	0.74	0.58	0.00
	(0.09)	(0.12)	(0.17)	(0.19)	(0.26)	(0.13)

^aValues for practice leaders’ relative commitment to improvement scores (higher practice leaders’ relative commitment scores reflect higher relative commitment).

^bImplementation capability composite scores (higher implementation capability scores reflect greater presence of facilitators and/or absence of barriers).

^c p values and R ² values are for the regression coefficients from a general linear regression model predicting wave from each of the relative commitment and implementation capability composites.