Skip to main content
. 2007 Jun;210(6):703–722. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7580.2007.00725.x

Table 3.

Bivariate comparisons against maturation quotient (MQ%)

vs. MQ R-rank P a 95% CI a b
AOMc –0.10 ns
AOAc –0.23 ns
AOMf –0.70 *** –0.438 –0.632 > –0.289 140.100
AOAf 0.05 ns
AFP 0.56 * 0.282 0.219 > 0.369 61.566
CBA 0.47 * 0.212 0.125 > 0.311 148.390
TBL 0.96 *** 0.140 0.119 > 0.161 3.635
ABL 0.97 *** 0.095 0.081 > 0.113 1.244
PBL 0.92 *** 0.046 0.039 > 0.054 2.309
SKV1/3 0.97 *** 0.150 0.124 > 0.175 4.529
EV1/3 0.97 *** 0.115 0.098 > 0.135 3.165
IV1/3 0.94 *** 0.037 0.030 > 0.045 3.486
SV1/3 0.96 *** 0.120 0.102 > 0.143 2.173
EBV1/3 0.92 *** 0.128 0.110 > 0.149 0.236
NSA1/2 0.92 *** 0.046 0.040 > 0.052 0.796
IRE –0.05 ns
RSE –0.40 ns
RIE –0.75 *** –0.005 –0.006 > –0.003 1.411
IRO 0.77 *** 0.004 0.003 > 0.005 –0.030
IREOi 0.67 ** 0.005 0.003 > 0.007 1.008
IREOii 0.70 *** 0.005 0.003 > 0.006 1.208
IRNi 0.28 ns
IRNii 0.34 ns
IRNiii –0.38 ns
IRSTi 0.67 ** 0.006 0.004 > 0.008 1.222
IRSTii 0.68 ** 0.005 0.004 > 0.007 1.471
*

P < 0.05

**

P < 0.01

***

P < 0.001; ns, not significant.