Table 3

Adjusted Effects of the Tailored Intervention (vs Control) on Postvisit Sociopsychological Factors, Visit Behaviors, and Colorectal Cancer Screening

OutcomeEntire Sample PEa (95% CI)Stratified by Ethnicity/Preferred Language
Non-Hispanic PEa (95% CI)Hispanic/English PEa (95% CI)Hispanic/Spanish PEa (95% CI)
EHBM sociopsychological factorsb
 Prefer specific test option, %6.8 (2.2 to 11.4)c5.8 (−0.9 to 12.4)11.1 (1.7 to 20.6)d4.3 (−3.8 to 12.5)
 Screening knowledge (total)e1.15 (0.86 to 1.44)f1.46 (1.04 to 1.87)f1.28 (0.70 to 1.86)f0.39 (−0.18 to 0.95)
 Screening self-efficacy0.10 (0.03 to 0.18)c0.11 (0.00 to 0.22)d0.11 (−0.03 to 0.25)0.07 (−0.07 to 0.21)
 Perceived screening barriers
  FOBT0.03 (−0.05 to 0.12)0.05 (−0.07 to 0.16)0.02 (−0.14 to 0.18)0.01 (−0.16 to 0.18)
  Colonoscopy0.02 (−0.06 to 0.09)0.02 (−0.09 to 0.13)−0.02 (−0.18 to 0.13)0.07 (−0.10 to 0.24)
 Stage of readiness for screening1.32 (1.05 to 1.66)d1.44 (1.03 to 2.00)d1.69 (1.07 to 2.67)d0.86 (0.53 to 1.38)
Visit behaviors, %g
 Discussion CRC screening8.6 (3.1 to 14.2)c9.2 (1.4 to 17.0)d10.5 (−0.2 to 21.2)6.0 (−5.7 to 17.8)
 Recommendation CRC screening6.4 (1.0 to 11.8)d8.1% (0.4 to 15.8%)d8.3 (−2.0 to 18.5%)3.1 (−7.5 to 13.7)
CRC screening, %h0.5 (−4.3 to 5.3)−0.3 (−7.4 to 6.8)−1.3 (−9.3 to 6.8)4.3 (−6.1 to 14.6)
  • CRC = colorectal cancer; EHBM = expanded health belief model; FOBT = fecal occult blood testing; IMCP = interactive multimedia computer program; PE = parameter estimate; SE = self-efficacy.

  • a Parameter estimates for total knowledge (score range = 0–9) and self-efficacy (score range = 1–5) represent the amount of change in score (ie, points); parameter estimates for specific test preference, discussion and recommendation of colorectal cancer screening, and colorectal cancer screening represent percentage point increases or decreases; parameter estimate for stage of readiness represents the odds of an increase in stage.

  • b All sociopsychological factor models were adjusted for the previsit value of the dependent variable and study recruitment center; the entire sample analyses also were adjusted for ethnicity/language strata.

  • c P <.01.

  • d P <.05.

  • e Analyses examined effects on a total colorectal cancer screening knowledge scale, derived by combining the scores for the knowledge of screening test options and knowledge of screening risks and inconveniences scales.

  • f P <.001.

  • g All visit behavior models were adjusted for study recruitment center; the entire sample analyses also were adjusted for ethnicity/language strata.

  • h Based on review of medical records, available for 1,132 participants (575 IMCP patients, 557 control patients). All receipt of screening models were adjusted for study recruitment center; the entire sample analysis also was adjusted for ethnicity/language strata.