Table 7.

Binomial path analysis of the effects of the intervention on preventive behaviors (2-factor solution), in which each profile is a dummy variable.

Mediator			Coefficient		SE		Lower CI		Upper CI		z		P value		AICa
Factor 1b as the dependent variable: Profile One
	Direct effect	–0.03		0.05		–0.13		0.07		–0.62		.53		3172.83
	Indirect effect	0.02		0.06		–0.10		0.15		0.35		.73
	Total effect	–0.01		0.08		–0.17		0.15		–0.12		.91
Factor 1b as the dependent variable: Profile Two
	Direct effect	–0.03		0.05		–0.13		0.07		–0.57		.57		2820.14
	Indirect effect	0.01		0.09		–0.17		0.19		0.09		.92
	Total effect	–0.02		0.11		–0.23		0.19		–0.20		.84
Factor 1b as the dependent variable: Profile Three
	Direct effect	–0.03		0.05		–0.13		0.07		–0.58		.56		3100.05
	Indirect effect	0.00		0.06		–0.11		0.12		0.08		.93
	Total effect	–0.03		0.08		–0.18		0.13		–0.33		.74
Factor 2c as the dependent variable: Profile One
	Direct effect	–0.04		0.05		–0.15		0.06		–0.81		.42		3237.87
	Indirect effect	0.08		0.23		–0.36		0.52		0.35		.73
	Total effect	0.04		0.23		–0.42		0.49		0.15		.88
Factor 2c as the dependent variable: Profile Two
	Direct effect	–0.03		0.06		–0.15		0.08		–0.59		.56		3020.59
	Indirect effect	0.02		0.22		–0.42		0.46		0.10		.92
	Total effect	–0.01		0.23		–0.47		0.44		–0.05		.96
Factor 2c as the dependent variable: Profile Three
	Direct effect	–0.04		0.05		–0.15		0.07		–0.69		.49		3203.54
	Indirect effect	0.02		0.23		–0.42		0.46		0.08		.93
	Total effect	–0.02		0.23		–0.48		0.44		–0.08		.94

^aAIC: Akaike information criterion.

^bPreventive behaviors 1, 4, 5, and 6.

^cPreventive behaviors 2, 3, and 7.