Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 3 Multinomial logistic regression analyses predicting profile membership

From: Characterizing the heterogeneity of clinician practice use in community mental health using latent profile analysis

  Moderate Eclectics vs. Low Eclectics OR [95% CI] a Moderate Eclectics vs. Family Preferred OR [95% CI] a Moderate Eclectics vs. Super Users OR [95% CI] a
Clinician Characteristics
 Years of experience 0.95 [0.89–1.00] 0.91* [0.87–0.95] 1.03* [1.01–1.06]
 Discipline
  Social Work 0.92 [0.48–1.76] 0.62 [0.20–2.01] 0.46* [0.22–0.97]
  Marriage and Family Therapist 0.17 [0.02–1.21] 0.91 [0.77–2.26] 0.88 [0.78–1.61]
  Other Master’s (e.g., counselor) 1.23 [0.76–2.00] 0.84 [0.50–1.42] 1.20 [0.75–1.94]
 EBP Initiatives Participation c
  Zero vs. One initiative 0.85 [0.53–1.37] 1.00 [0.59–1.70] 0.85 [0.56–1.28]
  Zero vs Two or more initiatives 0.90 [0.44–1.83] 0.94 [0.34–2.58] 1.62 [0.91–2.86]
  One vs. Two or more initiatives 1.21 [0.75–1.96] 0.74 [0.41–1.31] 1.12 [0.73–1.72]
 Highest Degree Obtained
 Doctoral Degree vs. Master’s 2.52* [1.05–6.07] -- b 2.10* [1.22–3.63]
 Professional Status
  Clinical Intern 0.61 [0.33–1.17] 1.17 [0.46–2.96] 0.34* [0.1–0.83]
  Clinically Licensed 0.75 [0.45–1.24] 0.88 [0.39–1.98] 0.51* [0.35–0.75]
  1. Note. *p < .05. ** p < .01. *** p < .001
  2. a Odds Ratios reflect the odds associated with being in the low eclectic, family preferred, or super user profiles relative to the moderate eclectics, controlling for client characteristics (client age and primary diagnosis)
  3. b Profile does not have sufficient cases on specified variable
  4. c We also examined initiative as a dichotomous yes/no variable and results were similarly non-significant