Table 2.

Change in Knowledge of Resources by Intervention Status

	Knowledge of resources		AOR (95% CI)†	P value
Resource category or type*   Intervention period	Usual care n = 184	HealtheRx n = 190
No. of resource types‡ (no. ± sd)
Baseline	1.6 ± 1.6	1.5 ± 1.6
Follow-up	1.8 ± 1.9	2.0 ± 1.9	2.15 (1.29–3.58)	0.003
1 or more resource types§ (%)
Baseline	66.3	63.7
Follow-up	62.1	71.6	3.38 (1.51–7.61)	0.003
2 or more resource types§ (%)
Baseline	39.7	39.0
Follow-up	42.2	51.3	2.34 (1.07–5.11)	0.03
Healthy eating (%)
Baseline	23.9	23.2
Follow-up	29.1	36.2	2.15 (0.96–4.83)	0.06
Individual counseling (%)
Baseline	35.3	33.2
Follow-up	35.9	38.8	1.64 (0.69–3.90)	0.26
Mortgage assistance (%)
Baseline	17.4	14.7
Follow-up	19.8	23.7	2.26 (0.92–5.56)	0.08
Smoking cessation (%)
Baseline	17.9	15.8
Follow-up	20.6	27.4	2.76 (1.07–7.12)	0.04
Stress management (%)
Baseline	20.7	18.4
Follow-up	29.3	28.4	1.16 (0.50–2.69)	0.74
Weight loss (%)
Baseline	40.2	41.1
Follow-up	40.5	49.5	2.26 (1.05–4.84)	0.04

*Participants were asked, “Do you know of any places that offer [resource type] on the South Side of Chicago?” and instructed to think about specific places

^†Mixed effects logistic regression models were used to estimate differences between usual care and HealtheRx groups at follow-up compared to baseline; adjusted for age, race/ethnicity, gender, educational attainment, insurance type, and clinical location (Primary Care Clinic or Emergency Department)

^‡For ordinal analyses, the number of resource types were analyzed from 0 (no reported knowledge of any resource types) to 6 (knowledge of all 6 resource types).

^§For binary analyses, participants with knowledge of (1) “1 or more resource types” (n = 1 to 6 resource types) were grouped together; and (2) “2 or more resource types” (n = 2 to 6 resource types) were grouped together