TABLE 4.
Summary of the Final Logistic Regression Model Predicting Q4 Status
| Predictor and Control Variables | No. | Adjusted Odds Ratio | 95% CI | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Predictor variables | ||||
| Change in No. of implemented EBIs between PY1 and PY2 | .001 | |||
| −1 or −2 | 14 | 1.5 | 0.3–6.4 | .622 |
| 0 | 78 | 1.0 | Referent | |
| +1 | 32 | 5.3 | 1.9–14.9 | .002 |
| +2 to +4 | 32 | 7.1 | 2.2–23.1 | .001 |
| No. of enhanced EBIs implemented during PY2 | .040 | |||
| 0 | 27 | 1.0 | Referent | |
| 1 or 2 | 71 | 4.1 | 1.4–12.0 | .012 |
| 3 or 4 | 58 | 3.5 | 1.0–11.7 | .046 |
| Control variable | ||||
| PY1 CRC screening rate | .020 | |||
| <25% | 32 | 5.1 | 1.2–22.9 | .032 |
| 25% to <35% | 33 | 4.8 | 1.3–18.0 | .022 |
| 35% to <45% | 35 | 1.5 | 0.4–5.4 | .565 |
| 45% to <55% | 34 | 1.4 | 0.3–5.5 | .665 |
| >55% | 22 | 1.0 | Referent |
Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; CRC, colorectal cancer; EBI, evidence-based intervention; PY1, program year 1; PY2, program year 2; Q4, highest quartile.
The final logistic model also included clinic size as a control variable, which was not significant