Table 7.
Intervention effectsa on binary secondary outcomes (EM-imputed datasetb).
| Outcomes after 3-months | WISEteens group (n=715) | Control group (n=734) | Between-group differences | |||||
| % (SE) | P | % (SE) | P | |||||
| F(df) | P | OR (95% CI) | ||||||
| Illegal drug usep revalence (%) | ||||||||
|
|
Baseline | 49.8 (0.02) |
|
49.6 (0.02) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3-months follow-up | 41.7 (0.02) | <.001 | 39.8 (0.02) | <.001 | 1.30 (1, 1446) | .254 | 1.22 (0.87 to 1.73) |
| Polydrugc prevalence (%) | ||||||||
|
|
Baseline | 47.8 (0.02) |
|
46.3 (0.02) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3-months follow-up | 41.1 (0.02) | <.001 | 39.8 (0.02) | <.001 | 0.02 (1, 1446) | .888 | 1.03 (0.73 to 1.44) |
aBased on (logistic) general linear mixed model with group as fixed factor, follow-up values as outcomes, and baseline scores, country and parental educational attainment as covariates.
bThe binary imputed prevalence outcomes (illegal drug use and polydrug use), a real number between 0 and 1 was transformed back into a dichotomous variable by rounding off to two positions behind the decimal point.
cCombined use of alcohol and any illegal drug in past 30 days.