1999). To determine whether an item belonged in a factor, the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval (CI) for that item was required to be greater than 0.30 in either study individually or in the pooled study analysis. Treatment effect analysis The treatment effect analysis was conducted using adjusted effect sizes from an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model of change
from baseline to week 12 using unit-standardized CAPS-SX17 scores and unit-standardized, factor-transformed CAPS-SX17 scores. CAPS-SX17 scores were standardized by dividing each mean score by the number of items used to calculate the end point score, which allowed the results to remain Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical in the (0–8) units of the original scale. These PKI-587 solubility dmso models were adjusted for baseline CAPS-SX17 score and study protocol. Both last observation carried forward (LOCF) and observed case analyses (OC) were performed. In addition to the ANCOVA analysis of the change from baseline score on the unit-standardized CAPS-SX17, Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical three transformations were conducted on the CAPS-SX17. The first created separate Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical analyses of the original unit-standardized CAPS-SX17 for each DSM-IV category (i.e., reexperiencing, avoidance/numbing, and hyperarousal). The second set of transformations created separate analyses for each of the three factors, by
averaging only the items that loaded significantly in each of the factors. The third transformation represented factor-weighted adjustments of Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical CAPS-SX17, which was obtained by multiplying factor scoring coefficients for each of
the CAPS-SX17 items before summation. Results Confirmatory factor analysis The CFA demonstrated a significant Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical lack of fit for the DSM-IV three-factor PTSD symptom structure in the pooled sample, as well as in the individual trials. The RMSEA criteria (values of 0.05 and 0.06 vs. recommended value <0.05), and Bentler–Bonett Normed Fit Index (value of 0.58 and 0.74 vs. a recommended value of >0.90) in the pooled sample suggested that the EFA was warranted. The polychoric correlation structure for the pooled studies (Table (Table3),3), the scree plot with Horn’s parallel analysis (Fig. (Fig.1),1), and SBC goodness-of-fit www.selleckchem.com/products/pifithrin-alpha.html test from the maximum likelihood factor analysis suggested a three-factor structure. The SBC has the largest absolute value and is the best fit for the three-factor structure (285), with slightly smaller values for two- (236) and four-factor (279) structures. The same analyses were performed with the individual study data, as well as additional analyses that used the pooled Pearson correlation matrix for normally distributed data, all of which produced results that were similar to those described above.