Skip to main content
. 2022 Jun 30;10(7):1229. doi: 10.3390/healthcare10071229

Table 6.

Assessment of the global structural model.

GLOBAL Path SD T-Value f2 95 CI H Supported
Direct effects VIF
Expenditure -> CWT −0.352 0.050 7.032 *** 0.142 [−0.452; −0.287] 1.000 Yes
Expenditure -> OWT −0.331 0.054 6.141 *** 0.201 [−0.423; −0.246] 1.142 Yes
CWT -> Satisfaction −0.122 0.098 1.236 ns 0.011 [−0.280; 0.045] 1.877 No
OWT -> Satisfaction −0.461 0.143 3.228 ** 0.168 [−0.590; −0.316] 1.745 Yes
CWT -> OWT 0.537 0.047 11.435 *** 0.529 [0.454; 0.609] 1.142 Yes
ED -> Satisfaction 0.129 0.073 1.759 * 0.020 [0.005; −0.245] 1.140 H1 Yes
Indirect effects VAF
Individual indirect effects
Expenditure -> CWT -> OWT −0.189 0.032 5.823 *** [−0.252; −0.145] 36.34 H2 Yes
Expenditure -> CWT -> Satisfaction 0.043 0.036 1.176 ns [−0.017; 0.103] 15.14 H3 No
Expenditure -> OWT -> Satisfaction 0.153 0.054 2.804 ** [0.097; 0.213] 54.15 H4 Yes
CWT -> OWT -> Satisfaction −0.247 0.079 3.113 ** [−0.335; −0.160] 66.93 H5 Yes
Expenditure -> CWT -> OWT-> Satisfaction 0.087 0.033 2.676 ** [0.053; 0.134] 30.71 H6 Yes
Global indirect effects
Expenditure -> Satisfaction 0.282 0.077 3.677 *** [0.231; 0.345] 100.00
Expenditure -> OWT −0.189 0.032 5.823 *** [−0.252; −0.145] 36.34
CWT -> Satisfaction −0.247 0.079 3.113 ** [−0.335; −0.160] 66.93
Total effect
Expenditure -> Satisfaction 0.282 0.077 3.677 *** [0.231; 0.345]
Expenditure -> OWT −0.52 0.041 12.611 *** [−0.600; −0.465]
CWT -> Satisfaction −0.369 0.104 3.554 *** [−0.481; −0.234]
OWT -> Satisfaction −0.461 0.143 3.228 ** [−0590; −0.316]

R2 adjusted [95% CI in brackets]: CWT: 0.121 [0.079; 0.201]; OWT: 0.519 [0.461; 0.597]; satisfaction: 0.270 [0.209; 0.357]; standardized path values reported. SD: Standard Deviation; f2: size effect index, values greater than 0.02, 0.15, and 0.35 represent small, medium, and large effect sizes; 95CI: 95% Bias-Corrected Confidence Interval; VIF: inner model Variance Inflation Factors; VAF: Variance Accounted Formula × 100 represents the proportion mediated. Significance, Standard Deviations, and 95% Bias-Corrected CIs were performed after applying bootstrap resampling for 10,000 subsamples; *: p < 0.05; **: p < 0.01; ***: p < 0.001. Only those total effects that differed from the direct effects are shown.