. 2020 Oct 14;17(20):7479. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17207479

Table 4.

Bootstrapping Result for Direct and Indirect Effects (n = 218).

Direct Effects	Path	t (>1.96)	BC 95% CI		f²	VIF (<5)	R² (≥0.1)	Q² (>0)
Direct Effects	Path	t (>1.96)	LB	UB	f²	VIF (<5)	R² (≥0.1)	Q² (>0)
NL → DA	−0.144	1.344	−0.347	0.071	0.011	2.845	0.352	0.304
DK → DA	0.148	1.532			0.013	2.579
BE → DA	0.002	0.031			0.000	1.561
BA → DA	0.032	0.285			0.001	1.729
SE → DA	0.044	0.642			0.002	1.271
SU → DA	0.027	0.319			0.001	1.131
EF → DA	0.373 ***	4.777			0.121	1.776
SMS → DA	0.321 ***	3.980			0.088	1.817
NL → DK	0.715 ***	24.640	0.657	0.769	1.048	1.000	0.512	0.508
NL → BE	0.380 ***	6.284	0.267	0.503	0.169	1.000	0.144	0.071
NL → BA	−0.501 ***	7.836	−0.606	−0.375	0.335	1.000	0.251	0.074
NL → SE	0.103	1.144	−0.127	0.254	0.011	1.000	0.011	0.004
NL → SU	0.114	0.850	−0.226	0.264	0.013	1.000	0.013	−0.010
NL → EF	0.499 ***	10.571	0.405	0.593	0.331	1.000	0.249	0.114
NL → SMS	0.598 ***	14.632	0.515	0.678	0.556	1.000	0.357	0.189
Indirect Effects	SIE	t (>1.96)	BC 95% CI		VAF (%)
Indirect Effects	SIE	t (>1.96)	LB	UB	VAF (%)
(1) NL → BA → DA	−0.016	0.291	−0.147	0.076	4.8
(2) NL → BE→ DA	0.001	0.030	−0.055	0.052	0.3
(3) NA → EF → DA	0.186 ***	4.406	0.110	0.280	55.9
(4) NL → SMS → DA	0.192 ***	3.840	0.103	0.304	57.7
(5) NL → SU → DA	0.003	0.235	−0.026	0.026	0.9
(6) NL → DK → DA	0.106	1.577	−0.022	0.246	31.8
(7) NL → SE → DA	0.005	0.400	−0.021	0.027	1.5

Analysed using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (bootstrapping at 5000 resamples, 2-tailed); *** p < 0.001; BC 95% CI: Bias-Corrected 95% Confidence Interval, LB: Lower bound, UB: Upper bound; NL: Nutrition literacy; DK: Dietary knowledge; BE: Perceived benefit; BA: Perceived barrier; SE: Perceived seriousness; SU: Perceived susceptibility; EF: Perceived self-efficacy; SMS: Self-management skills; DA: Dietary adherence; SIE: Specific Indirect Effect, VAF: Variance accounted for; VIF: Inner model inflation factor.