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