Table 4.
Summary of binary logistic regression analysis final model predicting conversion
Method | Wald χ2 | p | B (SE) | Exp(B) (95 % CI) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Backward | Constant | 14.89 | <0.001 | −4.41 (1.15) | |
Youth—Unusual Thoughts | 3.36 | 0.07 | 0.41 (0.22) | 1.50 (0.97–2.32) | |
Caregiver—Suspiciousness | 6.39 | 0.01 | 0.47 (0.19) | 1.60 (1.11–2.31) | |
Caregiver—Disorganized | 3.69 | 0.06 | 0.41 (0.21) | 1.51 (0.99–2.30) | |
Forward | Constant | 18.69 | <0.001 | −2.89 (0.67) | |
Caregiver—Suspiciousness | 7.09 | 0.008 | 0.47 (0.18) | 1.59 (1.13–2.25) | |
Caregiver—Disorganized | 4.63 | 0.03 | 0.45 (0.21) | 1.56 (1.04–2.35) |
Backward Model χ22 = 18.16, p <0.001; degrees of freedom for all variables=1 Hosmer-Lemeshow χ82 =5.12, p =0.75; R2 =0.23 (Cox & Snell), 0.33 (Nagelkerke)
Foward Model χ22 =14.37, p <0.001; Hosmer-Lemeshow χ82 =5.52, p =0.60; R2 =0.19 (Cox & Snell), 0.27 (Nagelkerke)