Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2018 Sep 1.
Published in final edited form as: Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017 Sep;140(3):571–580. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000003584

Table 2.

Comparison of mean test scores for adolescents with and without CFM

Controls Cases Cases vs. Controls
Unadjusted Adjusted1

Test Measure N Mean SD N Mean SD Difference 95% CI p-value Difference 95% CI p-value ES2
WASI Vocabulary 311 54.0 9.5 112 50.5 11.0 −3.5 −5.8 −1.2 0.003 −1.8 −3.9 0.3 0.10 −0.2
Matrix Reasoning 311 49.9 8.5 114 48.7 10.0 −1.2 −3.3 0.8 0.24 −0.1 −2.2 2.0 0.92 −0.01
Full Scale IQ 311 103.5 13.6 113 100.0 14.9 −3.4 −6.6 −0.3 0.03 −1.2 −4.2 1.8 0.44 −0.1
WRAT4 Spelling 310 107.7 13.9 113 104.8 16.2 −2.9 −6.2 0.5 0.09 −1.3 −4.9 2.2 0.46 −0.1
Math Computation 308 108.9 15.3 113 104.7 16.1 −4.2 −7.6 −0.8 0.02 −2.3 −5.7 1.2 0.20 −0.2
Reading Composite 308 103.2 14.6 110 97.2 16.7 −6.0 −9.5 −2.5 0.001 −3.7 −7.0 −0.3 0.04 −0.3
WJTA-III Writing Sample 298 104.4 12.1 107 99.4 14.2 −5.0 −8.1 −2.0 0.001 −3.6 −6.5 −0.7 0.01 −0.3
1

Standard scores used for all analyses; adjusted for age at assessment (continuous), gender, race/ethnicity (white non-Hispanic, Hispanic, other), income (categorical), primary caregiver’s highest level of education (categorical)

2

ES = Standardized effect size