Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 May 25.
Published in final edited form as: AIDS Educ Prev. 2017 Feb;29(1):14–23. doi: 10.1521/aeap.2017.29.1.14

Table 3.

Estimated Effect of Tailoring and eHealth Literacy on Sexual Health Decision Making

In which of the following ways did you use the sexual health information that you received in GC? Did you use the information to… Evaluate your personal risk for HIV/STIs? Educate others about HIV/STIs? Decide whether to get tested for HIV? Decide whether to get tested for STIs?

b SE b SE b SE b SE

eHealth Literacy by Condition a
 Tailored Intervention with Low Literacy .09 .28 .18 .26 .21 .26 .28 .27
 Non-Tailored Control with Low Literacy −.88* .34 −1.08*** .31 −.80* .32 −.75* .32
 Non-Tailored Control with High Literacy .12 .29 −.23 .27 .05 .28 −.28 .27
Age −.06 .06 −.06 .05 −.11* .06 −.16** .06
Race/Ethnicity b −.37 .23 −.69** .21 −.51* .21 −.44* .22
Completion of High School c −.46 .29 −.18 .27 .11 .28 −.16 .28
Internet Use .008 .13 −.09 .12 −.07 .13 .13 .13
Constant 4.55*** 1.27 4.69*** 1.17 5.27*** 1.19 5.86 1.19

Omnibus Test F(7,93)=2.57* F(7,93)=4.13*** F(7,93)=2.35*** F(7,92)=3.25**
R-Squared 16.22% 23.71% 15.01% 19.80%
a

Participants in the Tailored Intervention Condition with High eHealth Literacy served as referent group

b

Racial/ethnic minorities served as referent group

c

YMSM without a high school education served as referent group

*

p<.05;

**

p<.01;

***

p<.001