Your privacy, your choice

We use essential cookies to make sure the site can function. We also use optional cookies for advertising, personalisation of content, usage analysis, and social media.

By accepting optional cookies, you consent to the processing of your personal data - including transfers to third parties. Some third parties are outside of the European Economic Area, with varying standards of data protection.

See our privacy policy for more information on the use of your personal data.

for further information and to change your choices.
Skip to main content

Table 6 Results with adherence as a binary outcome

From: Effect of core versus enhanced implementation strategies on adherence to a clinical pathway for managing anxiety and depression in cancer patients in routine care: a cluster randomised controlled trial

Variable

Odds ratio (average difference to referent)

95% Confidence interval

p value

Adjusted means (%)b

Implementation arm

  

0.35

 

 Core

Referent

  

64.06

 Enhanced

1.16

0.85–1.59

 

66.19

Step allocationa

  

 < 0.001

 

 1

Referent

  

83.83

 2

0.05

0.03–0.09

 

20.70

 3

0.05

0.03–0.09

 

21.13

 4

0.05

0.02–0.10

 

20.32

  1. Note: As the interaction between implementation arm and step allocation was non-significant (p > 0.05), this table only presents the results of the main effects
  2. aStep 1 = minimal anxiety/depression, Step 2 = mild anxiety/depression, Step 3 = moderate anxiety/depression, Step 4 = severe anxiety/depression, Step 5 = very severe anxiety/depression but no patients scored in this Step
  3. b Adjusted mean differences in percentage of screening events achieving adherence (> 70%). Means have been adjusted for persons (due to repeated screens) and site (due to cluster randomisation)
Back to article page

Implementation Science

ISSN: 1748-5908