We chose

We chose selleck kinase inhibitor Weeks 2�C12 because we believed that the effects of the mediators would be most apparent in the early weeks after the data on mediators were obtained. For completeness, we also examined mediator effects from Weeks 2 to 52 (1 year). Because mediation analyses assume that the mediator is assessed before the outcome is attained and that therefore the outcome cannot be a cause of the mediator (Baron & Kenny, 1986; MacKinnon & Luecken, 2011), only subjects who were abstinent at Week 2 were included in the mediation analyses. The sample size for the mediation analyses was therefore reduced to N = 111. At two weeks postcessation, those assigned to FL counseling, compared with weekly participants, perceived significantly more social support from counseling (M = 8.5, SD = 2.0 vs. M = 7.

4, SD = 2.0, p = .006) and reported significantly greater usage of coping strategies to resist smoking (M = 8.1, SD = 2.4 vs. M = 6.8, SD = 2.4, p = .004). There were no significant differences between the counseling treatment groups, however, in reported levels of motivation, confidence, or effort at two weeks postquit (p values = .48, .09, and .56, respectively). Hence, we did not consider the variables motivation, confidence, and effort further as mediators given that they did not meet a criterion required of mediators, that is, that they be significantly related to the independent variable. We next examined the effects of perceived social support and use of coping strategies at Week 2 as mediators of the relationship between counseling treatment and continuous abstinence during the period from 2 to 12 weeks.

Using procedures suggested by Baron and Kenny (1986) and MacKinnon and Luecken (2011), we looked first at the effects of perceived social support as a mediator using three proportional hazards models (Cox regression). In the first model, counseling treatment condition was the predictor variable. The second model had perceived counseling support as the predictor variable, and the third model had both counseling treatment condition and perceived counseling support as independent variables. Both counseling treatment (p = .008, HR = 0.49 [0.28�C0.83]) and perceived counseling support (p = .019, HR = 0.86 [0.79�C0.98]) were significant in univariate models. When both variables were entered as predictors, the p value for treatment declined (p = .026, HR = 0.

54 [0.31�C0.93]), as did the effect of perceived counseling support (p = .069, HR = 0.89 [0.78�C1.01]). The percent decline in the regression weight for counseling treatment with social support in the model was 14.0%. Hence, following the suggestions GSK-3 of Baron and Kenny (1986) and MacKinnon and Luecken (2011), we can conclude that there was partial mediation of the treatment effect by the mediator, perceived social support, though the effect was relatively small. Identical models were employed for assessing degree of utilization of coping strategies as a mediator.

Related posts:

  1. With the over in thoughts, we chose to undertake a comprehensive
  2. How ever, Inhibitors,Modulators,Libraries in this study we chose
  3. , 2006; Buntin, Colla, Deb, Sood, & Escarce, 2010) In our study,
  4. Neutrophils play a rr Critical function inside the defense against invading micr
  5. Equal protein concentrations from just about every sample have be
This entry was posted in Antibody. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>