Table 3.
Predictorc | B | SE | OR | 95 % CI | p | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Advice to 80 %-100 % of at-risk clients | ||||||
Smoking d | ||||||
It is part of my role to provide preventive care to clients | 1.8 | 0.7 | 6.1 | 1.5 | 24.8 | . 01 |
Clients find it acceptable for me to talk with them about their health risk behaviours | −1.8 | 0.9 | 0.2 | 0.03 | 0.9 | . 03 |
Fruit and/or vegetable d | ||||||
It is part of my role to provide preventive care to clients | 1.7 | 0.8 | 5.5 | 1.1 | 26.8 | . 04 |
Clients I see are interested in changing their health risk behaviours | 0.8 | 0.4 | 2.2 | 1.1 | 4.5 | . 03 |
Physical Activity | ||||||
It is part of my role to provide preventive care to clients | 1.3 | 0.6 | 3.6 | 1.1 | 12.4 | . 04 |
All Behaviours | ||||||
Clients find it acceptable for me to talk with them about their health risk behaviours | −1.7 | 0.7 | 0.2 | 0.04 | 0.7 | . 01 |
Referral to 80 %-100 % of at-risk clients | ||||||
Alcohol | ||||||
Addressing health behaviours won’t jeopardise my relationship with the client | 1.2 | 0.5 | 3.2 | 1.2 | 9.0 | . 03 |
aLogistic regression models adjust for clinician age, gender, length of professional employment, remoteness of service, and professional discipline
bFinal logistic regression models unable to be calculated for fruit and/or vegetable assessment and all behaviours assessment as there were zero observations which provided care to 80-100 % of clients and who responded ‘unsure/disagree/strongly disagree’ to the attitudinal items entered
cThe following outcomes had no significant associations with attitudinal variables hence are not presented in the table: assessment: smoking, fruit and/or vegetable, alcohol, physical activity, all behaviours; advice: alcohol; referral: smoking, fruit and/or vegetable, physical activity, all behaviours
dCollinearity diagnostics for smoking advice model and fruit and/or vegetable advice model: Variance of inflation = 1.0 and 1.01 respectively, indicating that collinearity was not present