TABLE 7

Aim 3 Analyses: MLMs of Trajectories From 3 to 4.5 Years (n = 252)

BASC-2 Composite-ScaleLinear Effect (95% CI) for VIP 0–3aPbLinear Effect (95% CI) for VIP 3–5aPbInteraction Effect (95% CI) Age × VIP 3–5cPbInteraction Effect (95% CI) Age × VIP 0–3 × VIP 3–5dPb
Social Skillse0.06 (−0.15 to 0.28).58−0.01 (−0.23 to 0.20).920.01 (−0.003 to 0.02).140.02 (−0.01 to 0.03).31
Attention Problems−0.23 (−0.43 to−0.03).03−0.07 (−0.27 to 0.13).490.002 (−0.01 to 0.01).98−0.03 (−0.06 to 0.001).06
Hyperactivity−0.38 (−0.62 to −0.13).002−0.09 (−0.33 to 0.15).46−0.02 (−0.03 to −0.003).02−0.02 (−0.04 to 0.01).23
Aggression−0.17 (−0.34 to −0.01).04−0.13 (−0.30 to 0.03).12−0.01 (−0.02 to −0.01).04−0.01 (−0.03 to 0.01).34
Externalizing Problems−0.31 (−51 to −0.11).003−0.13 (−0.33 to 0.07).20−0.02 (−0.03 to −0.004).01−0.02 (−0.04 to 0.01).20
  • a MLM coefficient predicting difference between intervention and control in BASC-2 mean T-scores in SD units (Cohen’s d) across the 3 to 4.5 y period; models included age and dummy coded VIP 0–3 and VIP 3–5.

  • b P values were based on MLMs.

  • c MLM coefficient predicting additional difference in BASC-2 T-scores for families assigned to VIP 3–5 for each mo after second random assignment (regardless of enrollment random assignment status); models additionally included age × VIP 3–5 interaction term.

  • d MLM coefficient predicting additional difference in BASC-2 T-scores for families assigned to both VIP 0–3 and VIP 3–5 for each mo since second random assignment; models additionally included age × VIP 0–3 × VIP 3–5 interaction term.

  • e Higher T-scores indicate better outcomes for Social Skills and worse outcomes for other subscales.