Table 4.

Combined models of QOL for couples

Effect	Full model			Final model*
	Estimate	SE	Pr > |t|	Estimate	SE	Pr > |t|
Intercept	76.78	2.70	<.0001	76.90	2.37	<.0001
Role (referent: partner): patient	1.63	1.38	0.2395	1.40	0.66	0.0345
Partner age	0.21	0.08	0.0095	0.17	0.04	<.0001
Patient education	−0.33	0.13	0.0113	−0.36	0.12	0.0031
Patient age	−0.05	0.09	0.5776
Partner education	−0.09	0.19	0.6389
Family income	1.00	0.49	0.0422	1.00	0.45	0.0281
Uncertainty	−0.19	0.02	<.0001	−0.19	0.02	<.0001
Social support	0.19	0.02	<.0001	0.19	0.02	<.0001
Open dyadic communication	4.13	0.46	<.0001	4.15	0.46	<.0001
Phase of illness (referent: advanced)
Localized cancer	2.49	1.32	0.0587	2.37	1.03	0.0223
Recurrent cancer	4.50	1.88	0.0168	4.27	1.46	0.0035
General symptoms	−1.26	0.07	<.0001	−1.26	0.07	<.0001
Pca symptoms_sexual	0.31	0.16	0.0461	0.32	0.16	0.0441
Pca symptoms_hormonal	1.05	0.30	0.0004	1.05	0.29	0.0004
Role* phase of illness (referent: patient* advanced & partner* all phases
Patient* localized	−0.27	1.61	0.8679
Patient* recurrent	0.47	2.40	0.8448
−2 log likelihood	5666.2			5664.8
AIC**	5672.2			5670.2
BIC**	5682.7			5681.3

Bold numbers are significant findings

df = 601

^*Although couples with missing data tended to have advanced cancer, fixed effects of the variables of interest did not change after controlling for missing data

^**Smaller is better when comparing two models