Table 3 Hierarchical linear regression predicting CHR participant age using sample (CAPR vs NAPLS-3), sex at birth, and recruitment source as predictors (N = 820).

From: Shift in sex and age of individuals at a clinical high risk (CHR) for psychosis: relation to differences in recruitment methods and effect on sample characteristics

  

Model

Variables

Model

Step

df

F

R2

Predictor

t

b

SE (b)

95% CI (b)

Univariate models

1

1

132.97***

0.14

Sample

11.53***

4.42

0.38

3.67, 5.18

1

1

0.11

<0.01

Sex

-0.34

-0.10

0.29

-0.69, 0.49

1

2

106.27***

0.21

Recruitment Source

    
    

Self, internet

12.15***

4.72

0.39

3.96, 5.48

    

Self, not internet

9.78***

4.07

0.42

3.25, 4.88

Hierarchical model

1

1

132.97***

0.14

     
    

Sample

11.53***

4.42

0.38

3.67, 5.18

2

2

68.72***

0.14

     
    

Sample

11.72***

4.53

0.39

3.77, 5.29

    

Sex

2.00*

0.56

0.28

0.01, 1.11

3

4

70.45***

0.26

     
    

Sample

6.91***

2.82

0.41

2.02, 3.62

    

Sex

3.30**

0.87

0.26

0.35, 1.38

    

Self, internet

8.11***

3.48

0.43

2.64, 4.32

    

Self, not internet

9.15***

3.75

0.41

2.94, 4.55

4

6

51.78***

0.28

     
    

Sample

1.80

1.01

0.56

-0.09, 2.11

    

Sex

3.81***

0.99

0.26

0.48, 1.51

    

Self, internet

5.92***

2.70

0.46

1.80, 3.59

    

Self, not internet

4.11***

2.20

0.53

1.15, 3.25

    

Sample × self-internet

−3.47***

−3.18

0.92

−4.97, −1.38

    

Sample × self not internet

−4.22***

−4.52

1.07

−6.63, −2.42

  1. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.
  2. Overall model R2 = 0.29.
  3. Sample was coded −0.5 = NAPLS-3, 0.5 = CAPR. Sex was coded 0.5 = male, −0.5 = female.
  4. Reference group for recruitment source was other referred.
Back to article page