Skip to main content
. 2016 Mar 16;77(2):337–342. doi: 10.15288/jsad.2016.77.337

Table 1.

Changes in drinking at follow-up as a function of intervention conditions

graphic file with name jsad.2016.77.337tbl1.jpg

Predictor B χ2obs Incident risk/odds ratio [95% CI]
Zero inflation
 Intercept -3.430 5.40*
 Baseline DDQ 0.091 0.45 1.10 [0.84, 1.43]
 Descriptive 2.048 1.80 7.57 [0.39, 154.4]
 Descript + Injunct 0.208 0.01 1.23 [0.04, 36.41]
 Descriptive × Baseline DDQ -0.302 2.51 0.74 [0.51, 1.07]
 Descript + Injunct × Baseline DDQ -0.100 0.32 0.91 [0.64, 1.28]
Negative binomial
 Intercept 1.518 246.81**
 Baseline DDQ 0.082 29.65** 1.08 [1.05, 1.12]
 Descriptive -0.056 0.01 0.95 [0.74, 1.31]
 Descript + Injunct 0.160 1.39 1.17 [0.90, 1.53]
 Descriptive × Baseline DDQ -0.034 4.19* 0.97 [0.94, 0.99]
 Descrip + Injunct × Baseline DDQ -0.023 1.49 0.98 [0.94, 1.01]

Notes: Dummy-coded vectors were created for Descriptive and Descript + Injunct. N = 165. Descript + Injunct = descriptive plus injunctive condition; CI = confidence interval; DDQ = Daily Drinking Questionnaire.

*

p < .05;

**

p < .01.