Table 2.
First-leg results: MTO treatment regressed on mediators, by domain.
| Mediator domainsa | Total sample |
Boys |
Girls |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| χ2 | p | χ2 | p | χ2 | p | |
| Mental healthb | 3.60 | 0.166 | 9.96 | 0.007 | 3.88 | 0.144 |
| Smoking | 2.95 | 0.228 | 9.40 | 0.009 | 2.53 | 0.282 |
| Housing disarray | 7.72 | 0.052 | 7.18 | 0.067 | 3.60 | 0.308 |
| Housing quality observed | 27.33 | 0.000 | 16.13 | 0.007 | 17.98 | 0.003 |
| Housing quality adult report | 12.11 | 0.060 | 10.62 | 0.101 | 10.96 | 0.090 |
| Housing hardship | 20.42 | 0.005 | 13.96 | 0.052 | 17.42 | 0.015 |
| Housing mobility | 54.38 | 0.000 | 14.51 | 0.001 | 58.97 | 0.000 |
NOTE: From a model predicting treatment from all variables in a domain, plus baseline characteristics; reporting the Wald test of joint significance and associated p-value for whether the group of variables in each domain significantly predict treatment.
Each mediator domain included the group of variables detailed in Table 1.
We also tested a model adding generalized anxiety disorder; treatment significantly changed this group of mediators for the total sample (χ2 = 8.17, p = 0.04), boys (χ2 = 9.40, p = 0.02), and girls (χ2 = 9.80, p = 0.02).