Education on tick bite and Lyme borreliosis prevention, aimed at schoolchildren in the Netherlands: comparing the effects of an online educational video game versus a leaflet or no intervention

Table 4 Differences in intervention effects on knowledge and tick check frequency between intervention groups and control group after adjusting for confounders (knowing somebody with Lyme and having had lectures on ticks), based on Model 2

	Knowledge			Tick check frequency
	β	S.E.	p value	β ^a	S.E.	p value
(Intercept)	0.522	0.265	0.049	−0.034	0.241	0.886
t2 (reference: t1)	1.430	0.310	0.000	0.599	0.252	0.017
Leaflet (reference: game)	0.232	0.337	0.499	0.624	0.305	0.052
Control group (reference: game)	0.032	0.330	0.924	1.040	0.305	0.002
Knowing somebody with Lyme	0.604	0.178	0.001	0.710	0.178	0.000
Having had lectures on ticks	0.535	0.184	0.004	0.215	0.176	0.222
t2^aLeaflet	0.735	0.409	0.072	−0.601	0.291	0.039
t2^aControl	−0.532	0.335	0.112	−0.347	0.298	0.244
t2^aKnowing somebody with Lyme	−0.022	0.316	0.946	−0.270	0.253	0.286
t2^aHaving had lectures on ticks	−0.380	0.289	0.188	0.035	0.241	0.883

In bold: statistically significant values
^aBeta refers to the regression coefficient from the GLMM model. If for a given covariate Beta is greater (smaller) than zero, and the corresponding p-value is significant, then the covariate is positively (negatively) associated with the outcome (either knowledge or tick check frequency). If the Beta is not significant, then no evidence of an association between covariate and outcome was found

ISSN: 1471-2458