Skip to main content
. 2018 Dec 3;22(8):1406–1414. doi: 10.1017/S1368980018003282

Table 3.

Results of regression analyses comparing outcomes of CANTAB tests for SAM survivors v. controls, seven years after surviving an episode of SAM, in a cohort of Malawian children

CANTAB outcome SAM survivors (n 171) Controls (n 155) SAM survivors v. controls, adjusted only for age SAM survivors v. controls, adjusted for age, sex, HIV, SES SAM survivors v. controls, adjusted for HAZ, age, sex, HIV, SES
Mean sd Mean sd Difference 95 % CI P Difference 95 % CI P Difference 95 % CI P
BLC % correct 94·0 13·1 97·8 5·4 −4·02 −6·5, −1·6 0·001* −3·35 −6·1, −0·6 0·02* −1·78 −4·1, 0·5 0·13
IED total errors (adjusted) 93·7 81·5 75·3 77·3 18·34 −1·1, 37·7 0·06 6·79 −13·5, 27·1 0·51 3·75 −16·8, 24·3 0·72
MOT mean error 10·0 2·8 9·8 2·9 0·15 −0·5, 0·8 0·64 0·31 −0·4, 1·0 0·37 0·29 −0·4, 1·0 0·41
MOT mean latency (ms) 1347 502 1257 423 86·4 −16·0, 188·8 0·09 52·9 −60·0, 166·0 0·36 22·3 −90·2, 134·8 0·70
PAL total errors (adjusted) 111·1 70·4 96·3 71·7 13·9 −1·5, 29·4 0·08 8·04 −8·8, 24·9 0·35 5·57 −11·4, 22·5 0·52
PAL total errors (six shapes, adjusted) 31·2 19·7 28·4 20·8 2·61 −1·8, 7·1 0·25 1·23 −3·6, 6·1 0·62 0·59 −4·3, 5·5 0·81
PRM % correct 63·6 16·0 69·5 16·3 −4·36 −8·0, −0·71 0·02* −3·73 −7·6, 0·1 0·06 −3·6 −7·5, 0·3 0·07
IED total stages completed (ordered logistic) 5·77 3·5 6·5 3·3 −0·46 −0·9, −0·02 0·04* −0·32 −0·8, 0·2 0·21 −0·24 −0·8, 0·3 0·35

CANTAB, Cambridge Neuropsychological Testing Automated Battery; SAM, severe acute malnutrition; SES, socio-economic status; HAZ, height-for-age Z-score; BLC, Big/Little Circle; MOT, Motor Screening Test; PAL, Paired Associated Learning; PRM, Pattern Recognition Memory; IED, Intra/Extradimensional Set Shift.

*

Indicates significant difference (P < 0·05). Test outcomes quantifying the number of total errors are adjusted for incomplete tests, as participants who fail at earlier stages of the test have fewer opportunities to make errors.

Linear regression used unless otherwise stated.