Table 6 Likelihood ratio test of the neuro-glymphatic model versus the null model^a

Condition and Predictor	Amyloid Status	Model	AIC	BIC	logLik	LRT	DF	P
Sleep Condition, *Physio*_S	Positive	Null	396.0	422.1	−185.0
	Positive	Model	362.9	401.0	−162.4	45.2	6	<0.001
	Negative	Null	814.5	880.6	−384.2
	Negative	Model	735.4	830.2	−334.7	99.1	10	<0.001
Sleep Condition, *Hypno*_S	Positive	Null	396.0	422.1	−185.0
	Positive	Model	381.4	419.5	−171.7	26.6	6	<0.001
	Negative	Null	814.5	880.6	−384.2
	Negative	Model	741.6	836.5	−337.8	92.9	10	<0.001
Sleep Deprivation/Wake *Physio*_W	Positive	Null	337.4	360.9	−155.7
	Positive	Model	281.0	315.3	−121.5	68.4	6	<0.001
	Negative	Null	688.6	751.8	−321.3
	Negative	Model	623.5	714.1	−278.8	85.1	10	<0.001

^aAIC, Akaike Information Criteria; BIC, Bayesian Information Criteria; logLik, log likelihood; LRT, log likelihood ratio; DF, degrees of freedom; P, p-value; Physio_S and Physio_W, single predictors constructed from the linear combination of the full model predictors during the sleep and sleep deprivation (wake) conditions, respectively, for both amyloid positive and negative participants separately; Hypno_S, single predictor constructed from the full model hypnogram features during the sleep condition for both amyloid positive and negative participants separately. Two-sided p-values were calculated using a likelihood ratio test, with p-values derived from a chi-squared distribution. Degrees of freedom corresponded to the number of additional parameters in the more complex model. No adjustments were made for multiple comparisons. Bolded P values reflect significant LRT at P < 0.05.

Quick links

Search