Table 3.

Effect of the intervention on primary and secondary outcomes for frail older adults without cognitive impairment.

Outcomes			Values				Absolute scale effect size				Relative scale effect size
			Control (n=151)		Intervention (n=160)		Proportion differencea/mean difference (95% CI)		P value		Odds ratio (95% CI)b		P value
Primary outcome, n (%)
	Role assumed (active)c	139 (92.1)		149 (94.3)		3.3 (–5.8 to 12.4)		.47		1.70 (0.28 to 10.4)		.56
Secondary outcomes
	Preferred housing option (stay at home),d n (%)	100 (66.7)		97 (60.6)		–9.4 (–27.0 to 8.2)		.29		0.65 (0.24 to 1.75)		.39
	Housing decision made (stay at home),d n (%)	41 (27.3)		61 (38.1)		3.3 (–14.1 to 20.7)		.71		1.16 (0.28 to 4.85)		.84
	Decisional conflict (yes; scale ≥37.5), n (%)	28 (18.5)		20 (12.5)		–2.2 (–15.3 to 10.8)		.73		0.87 (0.20 to 3.74)		.85
	Decisional regret (yes; scale >0), n (%)	107 (70.9)		108 (67.5)		–13.9 (–31.3 to 3.6)		.12		0.50 (0.12 to 2.11)		.34
	Involvement in decision-making (Dyadic-OPTION),e mean (SD)	65.8 (19.4)		67.9 (17.2)		5.8 (–0.5 to 12.1)f		.07		N/Ag		N/A
	Quality of life (0-100),h mean (SD)	72.9 (23.8)		75.1 (22.3)		–2.1 (–10.0 to 5.9)g		.61		N/A		N/A

^aGeneralized linear mixed model with logit link function including intervention as a binary variable, a fixed effect (categorical) for time, and specifying a random effect for cluster.

^bLinear mixed model with dichotomous dependent variables to handle convergence issues and reported risk differences, which can be interpreted as a difference of proportions (dependent dichotomous variables coded 1/0) [54-56].

^cn=149 and n=158 for the control and intervention groups, respectively.

^dn=150 and n=159 for the control and intervention groups, respectively.

^eAssessed on a continuous scale ranging from 0 to 100.

^fLinear mixed model including intervention as binary variable, a fixed effect (categorical) for time, and specifying a random effect for cluster.

^gN/A: not applicable.

^hAssessed on a continuous scale ranging from 0 to 100.