Table 3. Statistics of three-group Region of Interest analysis: HV vs ALC vs ALC+PTSD.
| Region of Interest | Whole Model a F ratio, Prob > F |
Student’s t
|
% Difference in FA
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group | Level b | Least Square Mean (SE c) of FA | HV > ALC | HV > ALC+PTSD | ALC > ALC+PTSD | ||
| Anterior Commissure | 2.93, 0.017 | HV | A | 0.39 (0.020) | 25.6 | 18.0 | -10.3 |
| ALC | B | 0.29 (0.022) | |||||
| ALC+PTSD | B | 0.32 (0.020) | |||||
| Fornix | 4.90, 0.0006 | HV | A | 0.74 (0.019) | 10.8 | 18.8 | 8.9 |
| ALC | B | 0.66 (0.019) | |||||
| ALC+PTSD | B | 0.601 (0.019) | |||||
| Genu | 2.84, 0.020 | HV | A | 0.84 (0.011) | 2.4 | 3.6 | 1.2 |
| ALC | A | 0.82 (0.011) | |||||
| ALC+PTSD | A | 0.81 (0.013) | |||||
| Splenium+ | 3.89, 0.0031 | HV | A | 0.86 (0.013) | 0 | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| ALC | A | 0.86 (0.015) | |||||
| ALC+PTSD | A | 0.85 (0.014) | |||||
| Right IFO | 9.01, <0.0001 | HV | A | 0.62 (0.011) | 11.3 | 8.1 | -3.6 |
| ALC | B | 0.55 (0.011) | |||||
| ALC+PTSD | B | 0.57 (0.011) | |||||
| Right dorsal cingulum bundle | 0.50, 0.81 | HV | A | 0.53 (0.019) | 7.5 | 1.9 | -6.1 |
| ALC | A | 0.49 (0.019) | |||||
| ALC+PTSD | A | 0.52 (0.019) | |||||
| Left dorsal cingulum bundle | 1.37, 0.25 | HV | A | 0.61 (0.017) | 4.9 | 6.6 | 1.7 |
| ALC | A | 0.58 (0.019) | |||||
| ALC+PTSD | A | 0.57 (0.018) | |||||
a The whole model is corrected for group, sex, age, and group by sex. b Groups not sharing the same letter are significantly different. c Standard error + The observed significance of the whole model GLM in the splenium was the result of an effect of age, not group, on FA.