Table 3.

Results of latent growth curve models predicting CD4 and viral load outcomes (N = 294)

	CD4			Viral Load (log)
	B	95% CI	p	B	95% CI	p
Intercept
Threshold/Intercept	49.56	(−12.89, 112.02)	.12	1.84	(1.24, 2.45)	<.001
Site (ref. No-Intervention)
Site 1 Immediate	1.92	(−54.68, 58.53)	.95	0.22	(−0.28, 0.72)	.39
Site 2 Immediate	23.99	(−67.54, 115.51)	.61	−0.03	(−0.84, 0.79)	.94
Site 3 Immediate	−23.71	(−88.82, 41.40)	.48	0.02	(−0.69, 0.74)	.95
Site 3 Waitlist	4.19	(−49.76, 58.14)	.88	−0.32	(−0.69, 0.05)	.09
Slope 1
Intercept	−13.93	(−38.57, 10.70)	.27	0.10	(−0.18, 0.37)	.48
Site (ref. No-Intervention)
Site 1 Immediate	7.67	(−19.88, 35.21)	.59	−0.03	(−0.24, 0.18)	.79
Site 2 Immediate	−24.95	(−66.78, 16.88)	.24	−0.12	(−0.53, 0.29)	.57
Site 3 Immediate	18.32	(−6.63, 43.27)	.15	0.01	(−0.35, 0.36)	.97
Site 3 Waitlist	10.27	(−10.20, 30.74)	.33	0.07	(−0.10, 0.24)	.41
Slope 2
Intercept	43.44	(−5.03, 91.92)	.08	−0.12	(−0.53, 0.30)	.59
Sites (ref. No-Intervention)
Site 1 Immediate	6.42	(−44.24, 57.09)	.80	0.06	(−0.41, 0.52)	.82
Site 2 Immediate	−5.43	(−85.47, 74.61)	.89	0.14	(−0.26, 0.53)	.49
Site 3 Immediate	1.16	(−60.61, 62.94)	.97	−0.33	(−0.80, 0.15)	.18
Site 3 Waitlist	−38.40	(−79.51, 2.72)	.07	0.02	(−0.28, 0.32)	.89

Note. EMR = electronic medical records. Models were analyzed with the Site 4 No-Intervention comparison cohort as the referent category. Covariates include gender and pre-baseline EMR value of the outcome/s.