Skip to main content
. 2012 Nov 20;12:138. doi: 10.1186/1471-2377-12-138

Table 4.

Comparison of performances on EF tasks for EF-intact aMCI, EF-deficit aMCI and normal controls

  NC (n=36) EF-intact aMCI (n=15 ) EF-deficit aMCI (n= 19) For χ2 P NCvs.EF-intact aMCI
NCvs.EF-deficit aMCI
EF-intact-aMCIvs. EF-deficit aMCI
P Cohen’sd P Cohen’s d P Cohen’sd
Age, y
67.4 (5.0)
68.9 (6.5)
66.5 (7.0)
0.550
0.580
 
 
 
 
 
 
Sex(M/Total)
18/36
7/15
7/19
0.875
0.646
 
 
 
 
 
 
Education, y
11.1 (3.3)
10.3 (2.8)
9.67 (3.0)
1.242
0.295
 
 
 
 
 
 
Keep track
12.1 (2.6)
9.2 (2.5)
8.6 (2.6)
13.056
<0.001
0.002
1.137
<0.001
1.346
1.000
0.235
2-back
0.37 (0.2)
0.58 (0.24)
0.61 (0.22)
9.790
<0.001
0.008
0.951
0.001
1.142
1.000
0.130
Stop-signal
270.1 (35.0)
291.9 (15.4)
307.4 (39.3)
8.256
0.001
0.009
0.806
0.004
1.002
0.276
0.519
More-odd shifting
237.9 (86.1)
310.5 (29.3)
387.7 (110.0)
19.415
<0.001
0.022
1.098
<0.001
1.496
0.034
0.959
Stroop 319.2 (69.5) 332.6 (133.6) 329.2 (151.9) 0.096 0.908            

NC: normal controls. Mean (standard deviation). Comparison was performed using ANOVA with a post-hoc Bonferroni test among the EF-intact aMCI group, the EF-deficit aMCI group and the normal control group.