Table 2.

Effects of Cognitive Training on Digit Symbol Copy- Treatment-Received Model Results

	Speed of processing training vs. no-contact control		Reasoning training vs. no-contact control		Memory training vs. no-contact control
	Est. (SE)	95% CI	Est. (SE)	95% CI	Est. (SE)	95% CI
Fixed effects
Intercept	.068 (.062)	[−.054, .189]	.099 (.064)	[−.026, .224]	.083 (.063)	[−.041, .206]
Training Sessions	−.005 (.001)***	[−.007, −.002]	−.009 (.001)***	[−.012, −.006]	−.009 (.001)***	[−.012, −.007]
Age	.019 (.005)***	[.009, .030]	.019 (.006)**	[.008, .030]	.017 (.005)**	[.007, .028]
Female	−.259 (.069)***	[−.394, −.124]	−.293 (.071)***	[−.433, −.153]	−.272 (.071)***	[−.410, −.133]
Non-White	.372 (.071)***	[.233, .511]	.383 (.071)***	[.242, .523]	.433 (.072)***	[.292, .574]
Physical Functioning	−.008 (.001)***	[−.011, −.006]	−.009 (.001)***	[−.012, −.007]	−.009 (.001)***	[−.012, −.007]
Time	.003 (<.001)***	[.002, .004]	.003 (<.001)***	[.002, .004]	.003 (<.001)***	[.002, .004]
Age*Time	<.001 (<.001)***	[<.001, <.001]	<.001 (<.001)***	[<.001, <.001]	<.001 (<.001)***	[<.001, <.001]
Non-White*Time	.002 (.001)*	[<.001, .003]	.002 (.001)**	[.001, .004]	.003 (.001)***	[.002, .005]
Random effects
Residual	.077 (.002)***	[.073, .081]	.082 (.002)***	[.077, .086]	.089 (.002)***	[.085, .094]
Intercept	1.246 (.050)***	[1.152, 1.349]	1.293 (.053)***	[1.194, 1.400]	1.286 (.052)***	[1.188, 1.393]
Time	<.001 (<.001)***	[<.001, <.001]	<.001 (<.001)***	[<.001, <.001]	<.001 (<.001)***	[<.001, <.001]
Covariance (intercept, time)	−.002 (.001)**	[−.003, −.001]	−.002 (.001)**	[−.003, −.001]	−.002 (.001)**	[−.004, −.001]

Note. Higher scores on Digit Symbol Copy indicate worse performance. Final analytic samples with complete baseline outcome and covariate data were speed of processing training (n=690), reasoning training (n=679), memory training (n=692), and control (n=686). Est. = Unstandardized Estimate, CI = Confidence Interval, SE = Standard Error.

^*p < .05

^**p < .01

^***p < .001