Table 3.
Relationship of cognitive scales and validators, NESARC-III (N=36,085)
| Association with attention scale | Association with executive scale | Difference in relationship of construct validator category to each scaleb | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||||||
| Wald F(degrees-of-freedom) | p-value | Mean scale score (SE)a | Effect size (95% CI)a | Wald F(degrees-of-freedom) | p-value | Mean scale score (SE)a | Effect size (95% CI)a | ||
| Construct validators | |||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Education level | 24.85(4) | ≤.0001e | 99.04(4) | ≤.0001e | |||||
| Less than high school | 15.4 (.08) | reference | 9.4 (.09) | reference | |||||
| Completed high school | 15.9 (.06) | .134 (.090,.178) | 9.9 (.06) | .150 (.108,.191) | No | ||||
| Some college | 16.1 (.05) | .213 (.161,.265) | 10.5 (.05) | .306 (.253,.359) | Yesh; executive | ||||
| College degree | 16.3 (.05) | .258 (.205,.312) | 10.9 (.05) | .438 (.384,.491) | Yesi; executive | ||||
| Post-graduate study | 16.3 (.06) | .271 (.211,.331) | 11.3 (.05) | .555 (.494,.615) | Yesi; executive | ||||
|
| |||||||||
| Functional impairment | |||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| MCS-basedc | 1049.71(1) | ≤.0001e | 427.38(1) | ≤.0001e | |||||
| Yes | 14.5 (.06) | −.596 (−.632,−.560) | 9.6 (.05) | −.317 (−.347,−0.287) | Yesi; attention | ||||
| No | 16.5 (.03) | reference | 10.7 (.04) | reference | |||||
|
| |||||||||
| Role-basedd | 158.67(1) | ≤.0001f | 53.77(1) | ≤.0001f | |||||
| Yes | 15.6 (.06) | −.201 (−.233,−.170) | 10.1 (.05) | −.117 (−.149,−0.086) | Yesi; attention | ||||
| No | 16.2 (.04) | reference | 10.5 (.04) | reference | |||||
|
| |||||||||
| Discriminant validatorsj | |||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Region | 2.16(4) | .10g | 1.30(1) | .28g | |||||
|
| |||||||||
| Height | |||||||||
| Men | 2.19(1) | .14g | 5.34(1) | .02g | |||||
| Women | 0.10(1) | .75g | 0.15(1) | .70g | |||||
adjusted for sociodemographic covariates using linear regression in SUDAAN 11.0.1. For education level, these included: age (18–24, 25–44, 45–64, 65–74, 75+), gender (men, women), personal income ($0–$19,999, $20,000–$34,999, $35,000–$69,999, ≥$70,000), and race/ethnicity (White, Black, Native American, Asian/Pacific Islander, Hispanic). For functional impairment and region, those covariates were included as well as education (see categories in table above). For height, covariates included age, personal income, race/ethnicity and education.
“Effect size” refers to the “standardized difference”, the difference in the mean scale score for each group as compared to the reference, divided by the standard deviation of the scale in the sample (attention scale=3.34; executive scale=3.31).
the regressions for each scale was carried out simultaneously (bivariate regression), to test if the difference in the effect sizes for the scales (attention minus executive) was significantly different from zero, using Mplus 7.11 “model constraint” ; if there is a significant difference, the scale with greater effect size is listed. A Bonferroni corrected p-value of 0.05/5=.01 was used to declare significance, since five differences were initially tested: each of 4 non-reference education levels and MCS-based functional impairment; as sensitivity analysis, role-based functional impairment was not included in the Bonferroni corrections.
those with functional impairment had scores in the bottom twenty-fifth percentile of the Mental Component Summary (MCS) of the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey version 2
those with functional impairment are respondents whose situation at the time of the interview did not indicate functioning in a major role (full time work, studying, or homemaking; part time work and study; or retired and 65 or older).
significant, below the Bonferroni corrected p-value of 0.05/10=0.005. A denominator of 10 is used to account for the 5 initial association tests carried out for each of 2 scales: education, MCS-based functional impairment, region, height in men, and height in women.
as sensitivity analysis, not included in the Bonferroni corrections
not significant, above the Bonferroni corrected p-value of 0.05/10=0.005
p-value =0.002
p-value <0.001
Mean scale scores and effect sizes were not reported since the discriminant validators were not significantly associated with the cognitive scales