Sentences with phrase «mean subscale scores»

Variables were created by calculating the mean of all items in a subscale, and missing items were replaced with the participant's mean subscale score.

Not exact matches

In this study, the primary cognitive end - points measured were the mean change from baseline in the AD Assessment Scale - Cognitive subscale, and global scores in the AD Cooperative Study — Clinical Global Impression of Change (Henderson et al., 2009).

While not indicating actual scores on the SDQ, the authors reported that mean scores were mostly within the normal range, but a higher range of «cases» was found for each of the difficulties subscales.

Fifty percent of children (mean score = 15.72) scored in the clinical range and scores on subscales were between 36 percent for hyperactivity to 44 percent for emotional symptoms and conduct problems.

Table 2 shows the mean (SD) scores for each of the PedsQL scales and subscales by weight category.

The score of the subscale is the mean of the items (range 1 — 5).

Adolescents at high risk for addiction (n = 1210) were defined as students with baseline scores 1 SD above the school mean on one of the four subscales of the Substance Use Risk Profile Scale (anxiety sensitivity, hopelessness, impulsivity and sensation seeking); low - risk adolescents (n = 1433) did not meet these criteria.

Racial and ethnic minorities had a higher dropout rate (33 % vs 14 %; F1, 182 = 8.8; P <.005) and dropouts reported higher scores on the EDE subscales at baseline (mean [SD], 3.0 [0.9]-RRB- compared with nondropouts (2.7 [0.8]; F1, 182 = 4.0; P <.05).

Mother - infant interaction was videotaped either in the laboratory or at home at all postpartum assessments using 2 validated procedures.37, 38 Factor analysis of subscale scores for maternal and infant behaviors identified a single internally consistent principal component, responsive interaction, that was standardized at each assessment to a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 10.

The total and factor scores of the JW - DEQ version B and the HADS subscale scores were correlated by means of the Pearson product - moment correlation coefficients (concurrent validity).

The PT1 unit had mean scores of 4 and above for each subscale.

The PT2a unit had mean scores of 4 and above for 3 of the subscales (attention, relevance and confidence) and the PT2b unit had a mean score above 4 for the relevance subscale only.

At 24 months, externalising scores in the intervention and control groups were similar (mean 11.9 (SD 7.2) v 12.9 (7.4)-RRB-; however, on the parent behavior checklist subscale scores, intervention group parents were less likely to report harsh / abusive parenting (mean 38.9 (SD 7.7) v 40.5 (8.8); adjusted mean difference − 1.83, 95 % confidence interval − 3.12 to − 0.55) and unreasonable expectations of child development (40.9 (9.9) v 42.7 (9.6); − 2.18, − 3.74 to − 0.62).

The mean maternal depression, anxiety, and stress subscale scores were not markedly different between the two groups at either 18 or 24 months (table 2 ⇑).

Figures 2 — 4 show the plotted change over time in mean scores for the outcome measures that showed a significantly greater change in the intervention than control group at either 6 or 12 months: ECBI intensity scale, SDQ conduct subscale, and GHQ depression scale.

This pattern of change in means over the decade between the 2005 study and ours appears consistent with the small, but significant, increases observed between 2007 and 2012 in the self - report subscale means for Total Difficulties, Emotional Symptoms, Peer Relationship Problems and Hyperactivity - Inattention (but a decrease in Conduct Problems) in nationally representative New Zealand samples of children aged 12 — 15 years, 28 and with a similar increase in Emotional Symptoms and decrease in Conduct Problems between 2009 and 2014 in English community samples of children aged 11 — 13 years.29 The mean PLE score in the MCS sample aligned closely with that reported previously for a relatively deprived inner - city London, UK, community sample aged 9 — 12 years19 using these same nine items, although the overall prevalence of a «Certainly True» to at least one of the nine items in the MCS (52.2 %) was lower than that obtained in the London sample (66.0 %).8

The mean scores across the three virtues were obtained by averaging the scores for each subscale.

The mean scores for mothers» responses to the 3 CBCL subscales were comparable to those for nonreferred children reported by Achenbach, 24 suggesting that levels of behavioral problems for the Healthy Steps children were similar to the levels for generally healthy children.

The mean values for the intervention and control groups» subscale scores at pre -, post-intervention and 12 - month follow - up are presented in Table IV.

Results indicated pretest and posttest scores on the substance use and related problems showed slight improvements for both the SFBT and control groups based on the ASI - SR in all subscales, except for the family / relationship status subscale for control group which showed an increase in mean score and small effect size in the opposite desired direction.

Parents with lower education reported significantly higher scores on the subscale Hyperactivity - Inattention (mean difference = 0.34) as well as higher SDQ Total Difficulties score (mean difference = 0.79).

A total score for child related strains was calculated by computing a mean score of all four subscales.

In a previous validation study of the SDQ [43] data were obtained from 263 randomly selected parents of children 5 — 15 years old in the general population, but the authors did not present the norms in detail besides a figure presenting mean value of the Total Difficulties score of SDQ and subscales for the entire sample.

Suicidality was assessed with 3 items (hopelessness, thoughts of death, and thoughts of suicide) from the SCL - 20.27 Physical symptom severity was assessed with the PHQ - 15, a 15 - item scale scored from 0 to 30.28 Health - related quality of life was assessed on the Short Form - 12 (SF - 12) subscales measuring physical health and mental health — related functioning.29 Subscales are normed for the general population so that mean and standard deviation are approximately 50 and 10, respectively.30 Pain intensity and interference were assessed with the Adapted Numeric Rating Scale for Pain31; each item is rated on a 0 - to - 10 Likesubscales measuring physical health and mental health — related functioning.29 Subscales are normed for the general population so that mean and standard deviation are approximately 50 and 10, respectively.30 Pain intensity and interference were assessed with the Adapted Numeric Rating Scale for Pain31; each item is rated on a 0 - to - 10 LikeSubscales are normed for the general population so that mean and standard deviation are approximately 50 and 10, respectively.30 Pain intensity and interference were assessed with the Adapted Numeric Rating Scale for Pain31; each item is rated on a 0 - to - 10 Likert scale.

Before computing the subscale scores (sum across nine items; theoretical range 9 — 54), missing values (one to eight missing item responses for 7 participants) were substituted by this participant's scale mean based on the nonmissing items to obtain sum scores.

The mean scores on the intrusions (mean = 23.1; SD = 6.5) and avoidance (mean = 19.4; SD = 9.9) subscales were in the upper regions of the norm table for Dutch PTSD patients [33].

Participants scoring one or more SD above the mean on any of the four SURPS subscales will be deemed eligible for the current study.

Table 1 shows the mean total scores (and standard deviations) on the horizontal subscales of individualism and collectivism according to country.

Descriptive statistics document the mean reported number of trauma experiences and posttraumatic stress subscale scores by participants» sociodemographic variables.

What are the mean scores and subscale scores for each version of the questionnaire in this population?

Note The Y - axis represent the predicted means of the standardized TCP score, the X-axis the standardized score on the specific subscale of the EMBU

On the parenting subscale scores, intervention parents reported fewer unreasonable expectations of child development (37.3 (10.9) vs 39.9 (10.2), adjusted mean difference − 3.1, 95 % CI − 4.9 to − 1.4, p = 0.001).

Children with ADHD - C and ADHD - I were both significantly elevated (mean T - score > 65) on the PBS Attention Deficit subscale, but only children with ADHD - C were significantly elevated on the Hyperactivity and Impulsivity subscales, supporting their diagnoses of ADHD - C and ADHD - I.

The teachers higher scoring on several subscales was associated with slightly broader «normal» bands meaning that children some Chinese children who would be rated as «normal» would have been within the «borderline» band had they had the same score in a UK sample.

Children with current sleep problems were more likely still to be nursed to sleep by an adult and had slightly higher mean scores on Child Behavior Check List subscales for Aggressive Behavior (54 vs 52) and Somatic Problems (55 vs 53).

CSA group reported higher mean scores on 5 PSI parent domain subscales.

Finally, with regard to direct associations between CSA and later parenting stress, Wright et al. (2005) found that the mean scores for mother's reporting CSA on the parent subscales of the PSI were markedly higher on six out of seven subscales compared to the normative sample from Abidin (1995).

Although not reaching the clinically significant cutoff, children with sleep problems had significantly higher mean scores on Internalizing and Externalizing Behavior and the Aggressive Behavior and Somatic Problems subscales of the CBCL than children without sleep problems (Table 2).

The score on each subscale could be transformed into a mean score (maximum score = 4).

Scores in each subscale are calculated as an arithmetic mean.