Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Jun 16.
Published in final edited form as: JAMA Psychiatry. 2013 Nov;70(11):1133–1142. doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2013.1909

Table 3. Scores on the Neurocognitive Domains for Clinical High-Risk Subjects With Good and Poor Role Outcome.

Score Mean (SD) F2,152 Value P Value Cohen fa Post hoc Contrastsb
Good Role
(n = 47)
Poor Role
(n = 45)
Verbal memory −0.58 (1.01) −1.33 (1.56) 19.12 <.001 0.47 HC>PO; PO>GO
Working memory −0.40 (1.24) −0.96 (1.25) 8.75 <.001 0.35 HC>PO
Executive function −0.18 (1.29) −1.76 (2.87) 11.36 <.001 0.45 HC>PO; PO>GO
Sustained attention −0.48 (1.26) −0.68 (1.45) 6.15 .003 0.24 HC>PO; PO>GO
Processing speed −0.75 (1.29) −2.44 (2.91) 17.56 <.001 0.58 HC>PO, GO
Motor speed −0.09 (1.04) −0.81 (1.50) 3.32 .06 0.31
Visuospatial processing −0.62 (1.31) −0.86 (1.79) 5.54 .01 0.27 HC>PO
Language −0.34 (1.27) −1.31 (1.77) 8.95 <.001 0.42 HC>PO; PO>GO

Abbreviations: GO, good outcome; HC, healthy controls; PO, poor outcome.

a

Indicates a measure of effect size that provides the standardized mean difference between groups and can be interpreted using the following categories73: small = 0.10, medium = 0.25, large = 0.40.

b

Bonferroni-corrected post hoc contrast (P < .017).