Table 4.
Outcomes Related to the Health Action Process Approach Theoretical Framework and Change in Outcomes by Treatment Group and Timepoint
| Outcomea | Cronbach’s alpha |
Test- Retest |
Baseline Group Mean (±SE) |
Post-Intervention Change from Baseline Group Mean (±SE) |
3-mo.Follow-up Change from Baseline Group Mean (±SE) |
||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Exper. (n=35) |
Control (n=33) |
P-value b | Exper. (n=34) c |
Control (n=33) |
P-valueb | Exper. (n=35) |
Control (n=33) |
P-valueb | |||
| Risk for T2DM d | -- | 0.65 | 5.57 (±0.18) | 5.60 (±0.19) | 0.89 | −0.60 (±0.19)** e | −0.18 (±0.20) | 0.13 | −0.57 (±0.19)**e | −0.41 (±0.20) | 0.56 |
| Behavioral Intention |
0.74 | 0.62 | 3.30 (±0.09) | 3.12 (±0.10) | 0.19 | 0.23 (±0.11) | −0.02 (±0.11) | 0.12 | −0.04 (±0.11) | −0.23 (±0.11) | 0.23 |
| Action Planning | 0.82 | 0.79 | 2.62 (±0.10) | 2.38 (±0.10) | 0.09 | 0.42 (±0.09)*** | 0.12 (±0.09) | 0.02 | 0.22 (±0.09)* | 0.11 (±0.09) | 0.39 |
| Action Self-efficacy | 0.52 | 0,61 | 2.80 (±0.09) | 2.89 (±0.10) | 0.51 | 0.26 (±0.11)* | −0.21 (±0.11) | 0.00 | −0.01 (±0.10) | −0.25 (±0.11)* | 0.11 |
| Coping Self- efficacy |
0.89 | 0.44 | 3.15 (±0.10) | 3.05 (±0.10) | 0.49 | 0.16 (±0.10) | −0.16 (±0.11) | 0.04 | 0.04 (±0.10) | −0.16 (±0.11) | 0.17 |
| Outcome |
Cronbach’s alpha |
Test- Retest |
Baseline Group Median (range) |
Post-Intervention Change from Baseline Group Median (range) |
3-mo. Follow-up Change from Baseline Group Median (range) |
||||||
|
Exper. (n=35) |
Control (n=33) |
P-valuef |
Exper. (n=35) |
Control (n=33) |
P-valuef |
Exper. (n=35) |
Control (n=33) |
P-valuef | |||
| Outcome Expectancies |
0.74 | 0.79 | 3.60 (2.80, 4.0) |
3.60 (2.60, 4.0) |
0.67 | 0.0 (−1.0, 0.60) |
0.0 (−0.60, 0.60) |
0.50 | 0.2** g (−1.0, 1.0) |
−0.2 (−0.80, 1.0) |
0.00 |
| Recovery Self- efficacy |
0.94 | 0.46 | 3.0 (2.0, 4.0) |
3.0 (2.0, 4.0) |
0.95 | 0 (−1.33, 1.67) |
0 (−1.33, 1.0) |
0.20 | 0 (−1.33, 1.33) |
0 (−1.33, 1.0) |
0.06 |
Abbreviations: T2DM type 2 diabetes mellitus
Response options ranged from 1 = “not at all true” to 4 = “exactly true” except for the risk for type 2 diabetes question.
P <0.05 used for statistical significance; Student’s t-test within a repeated measures ANOVA model for between-group comparison
One person in the experimental group did not complete the assessment post-intervention.
Responses options ranged from 1 = “much below average” to 7 = “much above average” for 1-item regarding risk for developing type 2 diabetes.
P < 0.025 used for statistical significance to account for multiple comparisons; *P < 0.025; **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001; Student’s t-test within a repeated measures ANOVA model to compare the within-group change from baseline to post-intervention and from baseline to 3-month follow-up
P < 0.05 used for statistical significance; due to non-normality, P-values for between-group comparisons were based on the Wilcoxon test
P < 0.025 used for statistical significance to account for multiple comparisons; **P < 0.01; due to non-normality, P-values to compare the within-group change from baseline to 3-month follow-up were based on the Wilcoxon test