13.07.2015 Views

Access to substance abuse treatment in the Cape Town metropole ...

Access to substance abuse treatment in the Cape Town metropole ...

Access to substance abuse treatment in the Cape Town metropole ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Table 13. Independent sample t tests for cont<strong>in</strong>uous variables by genderVariablesMale(N = 279)Female(N = 276)t value df Effectsize (d)Mean (SD) Mean (SD)Predispos<strong>in</strong>g variablesNeighbourhood poverty 1.42 (0.58) 1.57 (0.60) -2.99** 551 0.25Self-efficacy- 1 month 2.30 (0.95) 2.08 (0.94) 2.77** 553 0.25Self-efficacy > 1 month 2.11 (1.00) 1.94 (0.98) 2.00* 553 0.17ADUSE-C 2.66 (0.70) 2.49 (0.76) 2.83** 553 0.25Need for <strong>treatment</strong> variablesDrug dependence severity 10.25 (1.32) 9.97 (1.52) 2.35** 541 0.20Perceived AOD severity 3.01 (1.25) 2.54 (1.46) 4.06*** 553 0.35Socrates-composite 55.93 (12.65) 50.00 (14.30) 5.15*** 543 0.44TCU- PR 30.94 (8.22) 29.00 (8.10) 2.79** 553 0.24TCU-DH 33.37 (7.93) 30.92 (9.38) 3.33** 553 0.28Age first used drugs 18.57 (3.06) 19.92 (4.31) -4.25*** 496 0.36Enabl<strong>in</strong>g/restrict<strong>in</strong>g variablesDistance <strong>to</strong> rehab 3.54 (0.65) 3.72 (0.49) -3.61*** 517 0.31Time <strong>to</strong> <strong>treatment</strong> 3.57 (0.61) 3.76 (0.46) -4.23*** 516 0.35Perceived utility barriers 23.53 (9.20) 25.94 (9.77) -2.99** 550 0.25Social trust 45.28 (8.72) 48.21 (8.92) -3.91*** 553 0.33Social cohesion 2.65 (0.51) 2.76 (0.71) -2.21* 498 0.18Culture/gender barriers 21.69 (7.20) 23.59 (8.32) -2.87** 540 0.24* " < .05; ** " < .01; *** " < .001Social trust, travell<strong>in</strong>g time <strong>to</strong> <strong>treatment</strong>, compet<strong>in</strong>g f<strong>in</strong>ancial needs, age at whichfirst used drugs, motivation <strong>to</strong> change (SOCRATES), desire for help,culture/gender barriers, <strong>in</strong>come (less than R500),and neighbourhood poverty allhad significant partial effects on gender group membership. The fac<strong>to</strong>rs that moststrong differentiated between female and male controls were <strong>the</strong> enabl<strong>in</strong>gvariables of compet<strong>in</strong>g needs (monetary), <strong>in</strong>come less than R500 per month, andtravell<strong>in</strong>g time <strong>to</strong> <strong>treatment</strong>. The <strong>in</strong>verted odds ratio shows that subjects who hadcompet<strong>in</strong>g monetary needs had almost triple <strong>the</strong> odds of be<strong>in</strong>g female. Similarly,<strong>the</strong> odds of controls be<strong>in</strong>g female <strong>in</strong>creased by a multiplicative fac<strong>to</strong>r of 2.2 for59

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!