Skip to main content

Table 4 School-level characteristics for phase 2 randomization (Facilitation vs. no Facilitation) for slower-responder schools (N = 83 schools)

From: Primary aim results of a clustered SMART for developing a school-level, adaptive implementation strategy to support CBT delivery at high schools in Michigan

  All slower-responder schools (N = 83) No Facilitation (N = 42) Facilitation (N = 41)
Proportion of schools with >500 students (vs. ≤ 500 students) 0.65 0.67 0.63
Proportion of rural schools (vs. non-rural) 0.55 0.55 0.56
Proportion of schools with >50% students on free/reduced lunch program (vs. ≤ 50%) 0.37 0.40 0.34
Proportion of schools with any pre-randomization CBT delivery (vs. none) 0.53 0.50 0.56
Proportion of schools with top 50% total CBT sessions in the 8 weeks within Phase 1 arm 0.49 0.48 0.51
Coaching (vs. no Coaching) 0.49 0.50 0.49
School-level proportion of SPs with graduate degree: mean (SD) 0.88 (.27) 0.81 (.35) 0.96 (.14)
Number of SPs per school Mean = 1.86 Mean = 1.90 Mean = 1.80
1 SP: N = 31 1 SP: N = 16 1 SP: N = 15
2 SPs: N = 33 2 SPs: N = 14 2 SPs: N = 19
3 SPs: N = 19 3 SPs: N = 12 3 SPs: N = 7
  1. All variables other than the number of SPs were included as covariates in regression models. Data on school size, geography, and free/reduced lunch were derived from baseline school administrator surveys and/or state data sources (e.g., MI School Data; https://www.mischooldata.org/); SP tenure and education from SP baseline surveys; and pre-randomization CBT delivery from SP weekly CBT reports during the pre-randomization run-in phase