Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2020 Feb 1.
Published in final edited form as: Appetite. 2018 Oct 5;133:24–31. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2018.09.010

Table 3.

Goodness of Fit Indices and Standardized Weights of Direct and Indirect Paths of the Model.

Path Estimate 95% CI
Correlation
s PGSTM
Sex 0.140 (−0.047, 0.316)
 C1 −0.129 (−0.295, 0.080)
 C2 0.013 (−0.180, 0.210)

Direct
PGS →
 RVS 0.219 (0.026, 0.406)
 mYFAS 0.062 (−0.129, 0.245)
 BMI −0.079 (−0.250, 0.119)
RVS →
 YFAS −0.211 (−0.339, −0.087)
 BMI −0.031 (−0.166, 0.110)
mYFAS →
 BMI 0.256 (0.095, 0.407)
 Sex 0.409 (0.262, 0.531)

Indirect
 PGS → mYFAS → BMI 0.016 (−0.025, 0.083)
 PGS → RVS → BMI −0.007 (−0.054, 0.019)
 PGS → RVS → mYFAS −0.046 (−0.123, −0.007)
 PGS → RVS → mYFAS → BMI −0.012 (−0.042, −0.002)

X2/df 11.352/11
CFI 0.993
TLI 0.988
RMSEA (90% CI) 0.014 (0.00, 0.084)
SRMR 0.042

Note. CI = confidence interval; PGS = polygenic scores; RVS = Right ventral striatum; mYFAS = Modified Yale Food Addiction Scale; BMI = body mass index; C1 = MDS ancestry principal component 1; C2 = MDS ancestry principal component 2; df = degrees of freedom; CFI = Comparative Fit Index; TLI = Tucker-Lewis Index; RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation; SRMR = standardized root mean square residual.