The comparative effectiveness of Core versus Core+Enhanced implementation strategies in a randomized controlled trial to improve substance use treatment receipt among justice-involved youth

Table 3 Contrasts among Study Phases for Treatment Services (controlling for covariates; H1)^a

Study Phase (M, SE) ^b	t	p	Lower 95% CI	Upper 95%CI	Effect size d
Reference: Baseline (0.15, 0.07)	Treatment Initiation
Early Experiment (0.20, 0.07)	−4.82	<.0001	0.03	0.08	0.06
Late Experiment (0.21, 0.07)	−4.80	<.0001	0.03	0.08	0.06
Maintenance (0.15, 0.07)	−0.34	0.74	−0.02	0.032	0.00
Reference: Baseline (0.04, 0.03)	Treatment Engagement
Early Experiment (0.07, 0.03)	−2.38	0.02	0.01	0.05	0.03
Late Experiment (0.04, 0.03)	−0.10	0.927	− 0.02	0.02	0.00
Maintenance (−0.01, 0.03)	4.37	< 0.0001	−0.07	−0.03	0.05
Reference: Baseline (0.01, 0.03)	Continuing Care
Early Experiment (0.03, 0.03)	1.64	0.10	−0.001	0.03	0.01
Late Experiment (0.01, 0.03)	0.65	0.52	−0.02	0.01	0.01
Maintenance (−0.03, 0.03)	4.68	< 0.0001	−0.06	−0.02	0.04

Note. ^a χ²(1) = 66.95, p < 0.0001, site variance = 0.08 (0.04), Z = 2.17, p = 0.02; residual variance = 0.44 (.01), Z = 66.95, p < .0001
^b Least Square Means (Standard Errors). 95% CI = 95% confidence intervals for the differences between least square means for the contrasts. The contrast between Baseline Phase and Pre-Randomization Phase was omitted because it was not involved in hypothesis testing. Treatment Initiation ES = .013; Treatment Engagement ES = .033; Continuing Care ES = .032. Effect size f² is an unbiased estimate of how much variance in the characteristic is accounted for by the condition (Core vs Core+Enhanced) in predicting the dependent variable

ISSN: 1472-6963