Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2010 Jul 7.
Published in final edited form as: Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 2006 May;14(2):228–244. doi: 10.1037/1064-1297.14.2.228

Table 8.

Conditional Latent Transition Probability Estimates for Family History Negative (FH−) and Family History Positive (FH+) Respondents Shown as Row Percentages, 95% Confidence Intervals, and Estimated Cell n

Time 1
Ages 24–32 years
Time 2
Ages 29–37 years
No dependence
Mild alcohol dependence
Severe alcohol dependence
Marginal
FH− FH+ FH− FH+ FH− FH+ FH− FH+
No dependence 88% 87% 10% 12% 2% 1% 79% 66%
85–91% 83–93% 8–13% 6–16% 1–3% 0–11% 77–83% 60–72%
1432 307 170 41 29 5 1631 352
Mild alcohol dependence 43% 34% 49% 51% 8% 16% 18% 25%
34–52% 20–44% 39–58% 39–65% 5–13% 9–29% 15–20% 19–31%
162 45 184 68 30 21 377 135
Severe alcohol dependence 0% 0% 67% 38% 33% 62% 2% 9%
0–39% 0–24% 44–80% 19–60% 17–52% 39–77% 2–4% 6–12%
0 0 35 18 17 29 51 47
Marginala 78% 66% 19% 24% 4% 10%
1594 352 389 127 76 55 2059 534

Note. N = 2,593. FH− n = 2,059; FH+ n = 534.

a

Standard errors are not computed for Time 2 marginals in WinLTA.