Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Mar 11.
Published in final edited form as: Dev Psychopathol. 2013 Nov;25(4 0 1):1171–1186. doi: 10.1017/S0954579413000448

Table 4. Social maladjustment and prediction of conversion to psychosis versus nonconversion.

Predictors Parameter Estimates Omnibus Tests

Overall Step Changea



β SE β Wald p HR (eβ) 95% CI (eβ) χ2 p χ2 p
Model 1 (n = 240)
 Childhood social adj. 0.02 0.13 0.02 .900 1.02 0.79–1.31
 Early adoles. social adj. 0.25 0.12 4.00 .046 1.28 1.01–1.63 5.52 .063 3.87 .049
Model 2 (n = 139)
 Childhood social adj. 0.04 0.14 0.10 .755 1.05 0.79–1.38
 Early adoles. social adj. 0.27 0.14 3.49 .062 1.31 0.99–1.74 4.82 .090 3.29 .070
Model 3 (n = 139)
 Childhood social adj. 0.04 0.14 0.08 .780 1.04 0.79–1.38
 Early adoles. social adj. 0.22 0.19 1.32 .250 1.25 0.86–1.82
 Late adoles. social adj. 0.07 0.18 0.15 .695 1.07 0.76–1.52 4.98 .173 0.15 .695
Model 4 (n = 139)
 Early adoles. social adj. 0.29 0.13 4.70 .030 1.33 1.03–1.73 4.75 .029

Note: A Cox regression analysis was performed using standardized Premorbid Adjustment Scale ratings. The reference group is nonconversion. Models 1–3, the method is forced entry; Model 4, the method is stepwise backward elimination. HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval.

a

The change from the previous step. For Model 1, this indicates the change from a univariate model with childhood as the only predictor (see Table 3). For Model 3, this indicates the change from Model 2.