Skip to main content
. 2020 Mar 13;11:425. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00425

TABLE 4.

Summary of models compared for Semantic Access.

Dependent variable: Semantic Access percentage
Model 1 Model 2 Model 3
Age at baseline −1.798*** (0.609) −1.357** (0.629) −1.335** (0.629)
Vocabulary-WAIS 2.418*** (0.611) 1.943*** (0.632) 1.961*** (0.632)
Evaluation Time 2.234*** (0.265) 2.162*** (0.280)
MCI-Stable −3.594 (1.835) −5.578** (2.504)
MCI-Worsened −15.690*** (2.623) −11.971** (4.855)
Evaluation Time × MCI-Stable 1.065 (0.913)
Evaluation Time × MCI-Worsened −2.199 (2.403)
Intercept 91.063*** (0.584) 87.996*** (0.826) 88.129*** (0.843)
Observations 641 641 641
Log Likelihood −2,273.151 −2,221.715 −2,217.955
Akaike Inf. Crit. 4,560.302 4,463.430 4,459.910
Bayesian Inf. Crit. 4,591.511 4,507.967 4,513.315
Bayes Factor 1.38479⋅1018 0.069

All models included random effects for intercepts and Age and Vocabulary at baseline as covariates. Model 1 is the null mixed model (i.e. intercepts and covariates only); Model 2 is the mixed model with main effects; and Model 3 is the mixed model with main effects and interactions. Coefficients and standard errors (in parentheses). ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01.