. 2020 Oct 7;25(2):389–404. doi: 10.1177/1362361320959959

Table 3.

Regression model fit and coefficients showing relationships within the autism group between WHOQoL-BREF domains for adults aged 18–30 years (N = 75) and CHIP-CE domains for children/adolescents aged 6–17 years (N = 180), with demographic factors, core autism traits and anxiety/depression symptoms.

		WHOQoL-BREF (adults 18–30 years)
		Physical Health	Psychological Health	Social Relationships	Environment	–
		β [95% CI]	β [95% CI]	β [95% CI]	β [95% CI]	–
Demographic	Age	0.01 [−0.18, 0.21]	−0.04 [−0.23, 0.14]	−0.03 [−0.23, 0.18]	–	–
	IQ	−0.05 [−0.27, 0.15]	−0.17 [−0.37, 0.03]	0.002 [−0.22, 0.22]	–	–
	Sex	0.14 [−0.07, 0.36]	0.08 [−0.12, 0.29]	−0.15 [−0.39, 0.07]	–	–
Core traits	SRS-2 (Self)	−0.05 [−0.29, 0.19]	−0.26 [−0.49, −0.03]^*	−0.23 [−0.50, 0.02]	–	–
Associated	DAWBA Anxiety^a	−0.12 [−0.30, 0.10]	−0.07 [−0.25, 0.13]	0.04 [−0.18, 0.24]	–	–
	DAWBA Depression^a	−0.38 [−0.40, −0.10]^***	−0.34 [−0.37, −0.08]^***	−0.40 [−0.44, −0.12]^***	–	–
Model fit $(R_{a d j}^{2})$		F_{(6, 75)} = 4.39, p = 0.001^***, $η_{p}^{2} = 0.57$ (20.1%)	F_{(6, 75)} = 6.24, p < 0.001^***, $η_{p}^{2} = 0.60$ (28.0%)	F_{(6, 74)} = 3.62, p = 0.003^***, $η_{p}^{2} = 0.56$ (16.4%)	F_{(6, 41)} = 2.49, p = 0.04^*, $η_{p}^{2} = 0.58$ (15.9%)	–
		CHIP-CE (Children/Adolescents 6–17 years)
		Satisfaction	Comfort	Resilience	Risk Avoidance	Achievement
		β [95% CI]	β [95% CI]	β [95% CI]	β [95% CI]	β [95% CI]
Demographic	Age	−0.13 [−0.29, −0.01]^*	0.07 [−0.06, 0.20]	−0.23 [−0.39, −0.09]^***	0.24 [0.11, 0.40]^***	−0.002 [−0.14, 0.13]
	IQ	−0.06 [−0.20, 0.07]	0.05 [−0.07, 0.18]	0.07 [−0.07, 0.22]	0.06 [−0.09, 0.20]	0.34 [0.22, 0.50]^***
	Sex	−0.005 [−0.15, 0.14]	0.07 [−0.06, 0.20]	−0.06 [−0.22, 0.09]	−0.18 [−0.36, −0.05]^**	−0.16 [−0.32, −0.03]^*
Core traits	SRS-2 (Parent)	−0.22 [−0.37, −0.08]^***	−0.14 [−0.27, −0.01]^*	−0.07 [−0.22, 0.08]	−0.19 [−0.34, −0.04]^*	−0.34 [−0.48, −0.20]^***
Associated	DAWBA Anxiety^a	−0.28 [−0.34, −0.12]^***	−0.33 [−0.35, −0.15]^***	−0.01 [−0.12, 0.11]	0.03 [−0.09, 0.15]	0.003 [−0.11, 0.11]
	DAWBA Depression^a	−0.28 [−0.38, −0.14]^***	−0.29 [−0.36, −0.14]^***	−0.22 [−0.32, −0.07]^***	−0.18 [−0.29, −0.04]**	−0.15 [−0.24, −0.01]^*
Model fit $(R_{a d j}^{2})$		F_{(6, 180)} = 13.69, p < 0.001^***, $η_{p}^{2} = 0.59$ (29.0%)	F_{(6, 180)} = 14.47, p < 0.001^***, $η_{p}^{2} = 0.60$ (30.3%)	F_{(6, 180)} = 4.45, p < 0.001^***, $η_{p}^{2} = 0.53$ (10.0%)	F_{(6, 180)} = 4.96, p < 0.001^***, $η_{p}^{2} = 0.54$ (11.3%)	F_{(6, 169)} = 11.74, p < 0.001^***, $η_{p}^{2} = 0.59$ (26.9%)

CI: confidence interval; SRS-2: Social Responsiveness Scale–Second Edition; β: standardised regression coefficient [95% confidence intervals]; F: F test for model significance (degrees of freedom, sample size); $η_{p}^{2}$ : partial eta-squared effect size. Residuals from regression models were approximately normally distributed and collinearity diagnostics suggested no multicollinearity between variables.

DAWBA scores were based on: Model a) multi-informant N = 58; self N = 107; parent N = 8; Model b) multi-informant N = 94; self N = 6; parent N = 207.

*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.008 (significant after Bonferroni correction; p = 0.05/6). The significance of bold values is ***p < 0.008.