Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2013 Dec 11.
Published in final edited form as: Arch Ophthalmol. 2012 Apr;130(4):10.1001/archophthalmol.2011.1626. doi: 10.1001/archophthalmol.2011.1626

Table 4.

Model 1 estimates and comparisons of mean central corneal thickness.

Mean (95% CI) P-value1 Mean (95% CI) P-value2 Mean (95% CI) P-value3
FECD Grade Controls Unaffected family Difference
0 558 (554, 562) -- 558 (547, 569) -- 0 (−12, 12) 0.97
Index Cases Affected family Difference
1–3 586 (567, 605) 0.003 571 (564, 577) 0.04 −16 (−36, 4) 0.12
4 596 (584, 607) <0.001 574 (564, 584) 0.03 −21 (−37, −6) 0.005
5 612 (604, 620) <0.001 595 (584, 607) <0.001 −17 (−31, −3) 0.02
6 648 (639, 658) <0.001 630 (618, 642) <0.001 −19 (−34, −4) 0.01
1

P-value associated with comparing the mean CCT between each index FECD grade group to controls.

2

P-value associated with comparing the mean CCT between each affected family member FECD grade group to unaffected family members.

3

P-value associated with comparing the mean CCT between affected family members to index cases or unaffected family members to controls.