. 2021 Aug 30;77(5):850–859. doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbab159

Table 3.

Controlled Mediation Models for cSES, Conscientiousness, and Neuroticism Predicting Cognitive Impairment

	CIND		Dementia
	Conscientiousness	Neuroticism	Conscientiousness	Neuroticism
	β/HR [95% CI], p	β/HR [95% CI], p	β/HR [95% CI], p	β/HR [95% CI], p
Indirect effect^a^,^b	−0.005 [−0.08 to −0.001], .006	−0.008 [−0.013 to −0.004], <.001	−0.011 [−0.019 to −0.004], .003	−0.011 [−0.021 to −0.001], .031
Total effect^b^,^c	−0.095 [−0.145 to −0.045], <.001	−0.099 [−0.148 to −0.049], <.001	−0.139 [−0.258 to −0.020], .022	−0.139 [−0.258 to −0.020], .022
Full indirect effect^b^,^d	−0.013 [−0.018 to −0.008], <.001		−0.022 [−0.034 to −0.011], <.001
Direct effect^e^,^f	0.914 [0.868 to 0.959], <.001		0.880 [0.775 to 0.985], .035
AIC	84,604.555		70,735.452
BIC	84,878.449		71,016.330

Note: HR = hazard ratio; AIC = Akaike information criterion; BIC = Bayesian information criterion; CIND = cognitive impairment not dementia; cSES = childhood socioeconomic status. Values were bolded to denote significance and make it easier for readers to identify this.

^aEffect of cSES on cognitive impairment through the indirect personality path.

^bEstimate is presented.

^cEffect of the indirect personality path and direct path of cSES on cognitive impairment.

^dSum of the indirect paths.

^eDirect effect of cSES on cognitive impairment.

^fHR is presented.