Table 4.
Predictor variable | VC credibility | VC attractiveness | Message relevance | CRC screening intention | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
B (SE) | P* | 95% CI | B (SE) | P* | 95% CI | B (SE) | P* | 95% CI | B (SE) | P* | 95% CI | |
Covariates | ||||||||||||
Age | 0.002 (0.008) | 0.8 | (−0.01, 0.02) | 0.01 (0.01) | 0.41 | (−0.01, 0.02) | −0.03 (0.01) | <0.001 | (−0.04, −0.02) | −0.02 (0.01) | <0.001 | (−0.04, −0.01) |
Sex (women) | 0.34 (0.10) | <0.001 | (0.15, 0.53) | 0.58 (0.09) | <0.001 | (0.41, 0.75) | 0.25 (0.08) | 0.002 | (0.09, 0.41) | 0.22 (0.08) | 0.009 | (0.05, 0.38) |
Main effects | ||||||||||||
Black vs. white participants (ref) | 0.38 (0.18) | 0.04 | (0.03, 0.75) | 0.11 (0.16) | 0.49 | (−0.20, 0.41) | 0.24 (0.15) | 0.11 | (−0.06, 0.54) | 0.53 (0.15) | <0.001 | (0.23, 0.84) |
Matched vs. not-matched (ref) | −0.25 (0.14) | 0.09 | (−0.53, 0.04) | −0.34 (0.13) | 0.01 | (−0.61, −0.08) | −0.20 (0.13) | 0.12 | (−0.45, 0.05) | −0.17 (0.13) | 0.18 | (−0.42, 0.08) |
Interactive VC vs. static VC (ref) | 0.45 (0.13) | 0.001 | (0.19, 0.72) | 0.41 (0.12) | <0.001 | (0.18, 0.64) | 0.26 (0.11) | 0.02 | (0.04, 0.48) | 0.14 (0.11) | 0.22 | (−0.08, 0.36) |
Interactions | ||||||||||||
VC type × race-matching | −0.14 (0.19) | 0.47 | (−0.51, 0.24) | −0.19 (0.17) | 0.26 | (−0.52, 0.14) | 0.12 (0.16) | 0.45 | (−0.20, 0.44) | 0.11 (0.16) | 0.51 | (−0.21, 0.43) |
VC type × participant race | 0.16 (0.22) | 0.48 | (−0.28, 0.60) | 0.07 (0.18) | 0.69 | (−0.28, 0.42) | −0.16 (0.17) | 0.35 | (−0.50, 0.18) | 0.02 (0.18) | 0.92 | (−0.32, 0.36) |
Race-matching × participant race | 0.56 (0.22) | 0.01 | (0.12, 1.00) | 0.93 (0.18) | <0.001 | (0.58, 1.29) | 0.47 (0.18) | 0.01 | (0.13, 0.82) | 0.29 (0.18) | 0.1 | (−0.05, 0.64) |
Abbreviation: VC, virtual clinician. CRC, colorectal cancer.
Regression analyses. All statistical tests were two-sided. B = unstandardized beta-coefficient; CI = confidence interval.