Table 3.
Linear regression associations with “Effectiveness”
| N (%)/ mean | 95% CI | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variable | (SD)a | β | Lower | Upper | p-value |
| Mean IMD score for SSSP b | 23.27 [8.09] | −0.09 | −0.29 | 0.11 | 0.445 |
| Did employees mandatory midwifery training include smoking cessation? | |||||
| No | 48 (41.4) | ref | - | - | - |
| Yes | 68 (58.6) | 1.25 | −2.38 | 4.88 | 0.567 |
| Did identification of smokers use both CO monitoring and the opt-out referral pathway? | |||||
| No | 92 (79.3) | ref | - | - | - |
| Yes | 24 (20.7) | −0.10 | −4.34 | 4.14 | 0.969 |
| Was the majority of one-to-one support offered by the SSSP in the clinic? | |||||
| No | 57 (53.8) | ref | - | - | - |
| Yes | 49 (46.2) | 6.62 | 3.12 | 10.12 | 0.002 |
| Did the SSSP centre offer couple or family support? | |||||
| No | 60 (56.1) | ref | - | - | - |
| Yes | 47 (43.9) | −3.07 | −6.65 | 0.50 | 0.157 |
| Were financial incentives offered by the SSSP? | |||||
| No | 70 (64.8) | ref | - | - | - |
| Yes | 38 (35.2) | 0.42 | −3.59 | 4.44 | 0.860 |
| Did the SSSP centre currently have a specialist advisor? | |||||
| No | 27 (22.7) | ref | - | - | - |
| Yes | 92 (77.3) | 0.49 | −3.33 | 4.32 | 0.831 |
| Did the SSSP offer dual therapy NRT? | |||||
| No | 13 (12.0) | ref | - | - | - |
| Yes | 95 (88.0) | −1.78 | −6.75 | 3.19 | 0.553 |
| Women who did not identify as white or mixed ethnicity women in the area covered by SSSP b (%) | 13.6 [14.9] | 0.08 | −0.03 | 0.19 | 0.227 |
| People aged ≥ 16 years with no qualifications b (%) | 22.8 [4.9] | −0.51 | −0.84 | −0.19 | 0.009 |
| People with dependent children b (%) | 64.1 [1.9] | 0.88 | 0.03 | 1.73 | 0.088 |
| People in managerial or professional occupations b (%) | 36.1 [8.4] | 0.13 | −0.06 | 0.32 | 0.270 |
| People aged < 18 years b (%) | 18.4 [3.1] | −0.48 | −1.01 | 0.04 | 0.132 |
aCounts and means prior to multiple imputation
bRegression results for mean centred variables