Skip to main content
. 2019 Aug 5;9:186. doi: 10.1038/s41398-019-0520-8

Table 2.

Distribution of OFC sulcogyral patterns

PGs (N = 165) HCs (N = 159) HCs from Chiavaras and Petridesb χ2 p Value BF10
N (%) N (%) N (%)
Left hemispherea 5.29 0.071 1.17
 Type I 65 (39) 74 (47) 24 (48) 1.49 0.223 0.58
 Type II 76 (46) 55 (34) 17 (34) 4.88 0.027 3.12
 Type III 19 (12) 27 (17) 9 (18) 1.87 0.171 0.50
 Type IV 5 (3) 3 (2) 0 (0)
Right hemispherea 4.85 0.088 0.82
 Type I 75 (45) 84 (53) 32 (64) 1.39 0.238 0.56
 Type II 72 (44) 53 (33) 13 (26) 4.19 0.041 2.19
 Type III 13 (8) 20 (13) 5 (10) 1.81 0.179 0.41
 Type IV 5 (3) 2 (1) 0 (0)
Total (L+R)a 10.11 0.006 6.29
 Type I 140 (42) 158 (50) 56 (56) 2.88 0.090 0.83
 Type II 148 (45) 108 (34) 30 (30) 9.06 0.003 18.0
 Type III 32 (10) 47 (15) 14 (14) 3.65 0.056 0.80
 Type IV 10 (3) 5 (1) 0 (0)

Because pairwise group comparison analyses involved three statistical tests (one per OFC subtype), we used a Bonferroni-corrected significance threshold of 0.05/3 = 0.017

Statistically significant results (i.e. p < 0.017) are displayed in bold

PGs pathological gamblers, HCs healthy controls, BF Bayes Factor, L left, R right

aAnalyses comparing the distribution of OFC sulcogyral patterns between PGs and HCs in the present study

bData from the HCs (N = 50) of Chiavaras and Petrides (2000) are included in the table for ease of comparison