Stepwise logistic and multiple regression analyses gave
the same outcome variable predictors as the one step method: global outcome rating (disease conviction, P = 0.04; odds ratio 0.65, 95 % confidence interval 0.43 to 0.65); general health questionnaire score 5 or more (affective inhibition P = 0.007; 1.46, 1.1 to 1.9); delayed type hypersensitivity skin response (delayed hypersensitivity P = 0.005; 1.55, 1.35 to 1.82) and Karnofsky score (disease conviction, P = 0.003).
Not exact matches
Is evolution predictable, always yielding the
same traits, or is it contingent on infinite
variables, delivering infinite
outcomes?
c Refers to the Time 1 measurement of the
same eating behaviour
variable used as the Time 2
outcome variable
Factor analyses were then carried out for the multiple - item scores and single item scores from the
same group of
variables (work demands; resources; personality; coping and
outcomes).
The average
same -
variable correlations for each
variable group (full - scale v single item) were 0.66 (work characteristics), 0.63 (personality), 0.37 (coping style) and 0.63 (
outcomes), suggesting good concurrent validity (above 0.50) in all but coping style.
Multiple regression analyses were used to assess the relation between the
same independent predictor
variables and dimensional
outcome measures (Karnofsky performance index).
Because they presented bimodal distributions, the hospitalization and injury
outcomes variables were analyzed as dichotomous
variables with logistic regressions using the
same hierarchical model design.
What remains unclear is the impact of family - related
variables on
outcomes in both mothers and fathers within the
same family.
The
same predictors were used in a different model, with the Disgust measure of FaceReader Software as the
outcome variable.
A third model with the
same predictors and random effects was performed with the FaceReader measure of disgust as dichotomous
outcome variable.
Numerous theorists have argued that two - wave or «half longitudinal» designs (in which the mediator is measured at the
same time point as either the predictor or
outcome variable) are a cost - effective way to examine mediation and are preferable to more widely - used cross-sectional designs (Cole and Maxwell, 2003; Little et al., 2007; Newsom, 2015; Preacher, 2015).
However, correlations between the FIMP scores and
outcome measures found in our study are not lower than those reported in previous studies in which FIMP scores were obtained from the
same families as the
outcome variables (see Forgatch and DeGarmo 2011; Hukkelberg and Ogden 2013).