. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2011 Sep 1.

Published in final edited form as: J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol. 2010 Sep;39(5):650–666. doi: 10.1080/15374416.2010.501287

Table 6. Multinomial Logistic Regressions of CBCL, TRF and TOF Scales for Predicting Categorical ADHD Diagnoses.

	ADHD-C vs. Non-ADHD	ADHD-C vs. ADHD-IN
Predictors	Odds Ratio^a	Odds Ratio^b	Nagelkerke R²
Model 3a			.69^***
1. CBCL Attention Problems	1.55 (1.32-1.83)^***	1.03 (0.90-1.18)
2. TRF Attention Problems	1.16 (1.10-1.23)^***	1.04 (0.99-1.09)
3. TOF Attention Problems-WISC-IV	1.12 (1.02-1.23)^*^c	1.08 (1.01-1.17)^*
Model 3b			.67^***
1. CBCL Attention Problems	1.54 (1.31-1.81)^***	1.03 (0.90-1.17)
2. TRF Attention Problems	1.16 (1.11-1.23)^***	1.04 (0.99-1.09)
3. TOF Oppositional-WISC-IV	1.09 (0.95-1.25)	1.09 (0.96-1.24)
Model 3c			.72^***
1. CBCL Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Problems	1.85 (1.49-2.30)^***	1.28 (1.06-1.54)^*^c
2. TRF Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Problems	1.34 (1.21-1.48)^***	1.15 (1.06-1.26)^**
3. TOF Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Problems-WISC-IV	1.04 (0.97-1.12)	1.05 (0.98-1.21)

Note: Total N = 200. ADHD-C = Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder-Combined type; ADHD-IN = Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder-Inattentive type; TOF = Test Observation Form; CBCL = Child Behavior Checklist; TRF = Teacher's Report Form.

Odds ratios (95% confidence interval) showing independent contribution of each predictor with Non-ADHD as reference category.

Odds ratios (95% confidence interval) showing independent contribution of each predictor with ADHD-IN as reference category.

Possible chance effect when corrected for number of analyses (Sakoda, Cohen & Beall, 1954).

p <.05.

^**

p <.01.

^***

p <.001.