Sentences with phrase «of dichotomous variables»

For the slope factor of the dichotomous variables, the first three factor loadings were fixed and the last four were freely estimated -LRB--2, -1, 0, 0.26, 0.64, 0.93, 1.26 for W1 - W7, respectively).

Two covariances across the growth models were statistically significant (between the intercepts, covariance = 3.87, p < 0.01, and between the intercept of the continuous variables and the slope of the dichotomous variables, covariance = -0.69, p < 0.05).

However, the path coefficient from the internalizing x externalizing interaction factor to the intercept of dichotomous variables was not statistically significant when the intercept was specified at W6 and W7, βs = − 2.12 to − 3.12, ps > 0.30.

The use of dichotomous variables did not alter significantly the strength or direction of the associated predictors.

Not exact matches

The two dimensions are continuous variables, not dichotomous; so one may speak of «degrees» of Rousseau's civil religion.

To facilitate presentation of the final model, dichotomous variables were constructed for these factors (ie, goal ≤ 26 weeks or > 26 weeks and maternal age ≤ 30 years or > 30 years).

This variable was coded as a dichotomous variable with a Likert score of 1 — 3 indicating «disliked breastfeeding» and a Likert score of 4 — 5 indicating «liked breastfeeding.»

Hyperreactivity was analyzed as a dichotomous variable at two cutoff points (PC20 of 8 mg per milliliter or less or PC20 of 16 mg per milliliter or less).

Each bar represents the magnitude of the coefficient on the dichotomous race / ethnicity variable.

The fact of the matter is is that all states have essentially the same school level data (i.e., very similar test scores by students over time, links to teachers, and series of typically dichotomous / binary variables meant to capture things like special education status, English language status, free - and - reduced lunch eligibility, etc.).

For the first analysis seven dichotomous variables (yes / no) were created to see if either the intervention or control identified any of the seven dental abnormalities.

107 Figure 2, which is based on Models 2 and 3 in Table 4, was derived similarly to Figure 1 by setting continuous variables to their mean values, dichotomous variables to their modal levels, and ordered variables to their median values, as well as varying the readability score variable from -3 to 3, which is the approximate range of values in our dataset.

To generate predicted probabilities, we held all variables at their means (or modal values if dichotomous) aside from the difference in readability score variable, which we varied from -4 to 4 based on the spectrum of our data.102 The results for the predicted probability that a moving party prevails on a motion for summary judgment based on a given readability score are presented in Figure 1 below.103

As shown in Table 5, the score and dichotomous variable (0 = non-clinical, 1 = clinical), internalizing problems was significantly associated with: child's age (β = 0.42), mother's age (β = − 0.32), currently visits to their father (β = 0.56), mo - ther's anxiety (β = 0.63), and the number of years the child lived with the father in the past (β = − 0.32).

The number of adverse childhood experiences was summed for each respondent (range, 0 - 8); analyses were repeated with the summed score as an ordinal variable (0, 1, 2, 3, 4, or ≥ 5) or as 5 dichotomous variables (yes / no) with 0 experiences as the referent.

Specifically, the relation of mother's remission status to change in CBCL score was modeled so that the change score was treated as the dependent variable, with mother's remission status as a dichotomous independent variable, and with the baseline value of the CBCL score and the mother's baseline HRDS as covariates.

We formed a composite indicator of family SES consisting of six dichotomous variables measured at study entry.

On the basis of this information, we identified obesity in parents (BMI ≥ 30) and siblings (BMI ≥ 95th age - and gender - related percentile), which led to 3 dichotomous variables.

This solution was deemed most appropriate given that the assumption of multivariate normality was not fulfilled due to dichotomous variables and the tetrachoric correlation matrices being not positive definite.

The estimated effects of continuous outcomes are presented as a standardised effect size and dichotomous variables as OR.

The Parents» Evaluation of Developmental Status identified parental concerns regarding their child's development.26 It consists of 10 items that elicit concerns about speech and language, motor development, behavior, social - emotional health, self - help skills, school skills, and global cognitive function.26 A dichotomous variable indicated whether parents had significant concerns regarding their child's development.

The baseline covariates serve as adjustment for potential differences between intervention and control families that resulted from nonrandom assignment at quasi-experimental sites or selective reporting of outcome data.29 Results of these adjusted analyses are reported as ORs for dichotomous variables and as differences in means for continuous outcomes.

Generalized regression models (logistic regression for dichotomous outcomes, linear regression for continuous outcomes) were used to estimate the overall adjusted effects of Healthy Steps.26, 27 These models included site variables to account for the fact that families within sites tend to respond more similarly than those at different sites.

On the basis of the variable distribution, a dichotomous variable indicated low and high quality at the midpoint of 20 (range: 6 to 24, with 24 being the highest quality).

Parents were asked whether their child used a seat belt without a booster seat most of the time, some of the time, or none of the time, and a dichotomous variable was created that indicated most of the time versus other.

The relations between independent predictor variables (measures of immunological and psychological function at entry to the trial, age of onset, and duration of illness) and dependent dichotomous outcome variables (self rated global outcome; presence or absence of caseness on the general health questionnaire at follow up; reduced or normal delayed responses to hypersensitivity skin test) were examined in separate logistic regression analyses.

Because previous research (Gilligan et al., in press; Suitor et al., 2009) has shown that the perception of any favoritism, rather than the particular pattern (e.g., mother preferred the respondent or another child), predicted sibling tension, we used the children's responses to create a dichotomous variable: 0 = child does not perceive mother as preferring any particular offspring as her future caregiver and 1 = child perceives that mother prefers either him / herself or another child as her caregiver.

Our first independent variable is marital status, which is a dichotomous variable distinguishing between (a) respondents who were married in 1992/93 but experienced the death of their spouses between 1992/93 and 2003/05 and (b) respondents who are continuously married during the same period of time.

As the outcome of interest — removal from the classroom through either suspension or expulsion — was a dichotomous variable, a logistic regression was most appropriate.

For the purpose of clinical interpretation, however, a dichotomous variable was also created to identify those children scoring at or above the 90th percentile for this sample.

The dichotomous variable of having a late versus earlier preterm infant was examined as an alternative to neonatal risk, but there were no significant differences in the findings, and thus, the continuous neonatal risk variable was used in the final models.

The internalizing x externalizing interaction factor was a statistically significant predictor of the intercept for dichotomous variables when it was specified at W1, W2, W4, and W5, βs = − 11.80 to − 3.23, ps < 0.05, and the nature of this interaction was similar to that described in our main analysis with W3 specified as the intercept.

A third model with the same predictors and random effects was performed with the FaceReader measure of disgust as dichotomous outcome variable.

No gender differences were found with respect to attachment to mother (χ 2 (1) =.003, p >.05) or father (χ 2 (1) =.26, p >.05), nor were there any effects of child age (entered in a logistic regression with dichotomous attachment classification as outcome variable) for mother B =.02, p =.67 and father B = −.03, p =.49.