TABLE 6

Aim 3 Analyses: Impact of VIP Dose on Mean (SD) BASC-2 T-Scores at 4.5 Years

BASC-2 Composite-ScaleBoth Control 0–3 Years and Control 3–5 Years (n = 59), Mean (SD)VIP 0–3 Only (n = 70), Mean (SD)VIP 3–5 Only (n = 61), Mean (SD)Both VIP 0–3 and VIP 3–5 (n = 62), Mean (SD)Effect Size (95% CI) per DoseaEffect Size (95% CI) for Double DosebPc
Social Skillsd51.2 (10.0)52.0 (11.6)51.6 (10.1)52.7 (10.1)0.08 (−0.11 to 0.26)0.15 (−0.22 to 0.53).42
Attention Problems49.5 (8.7)47.2 (9.8)49.2 (9.6)45.7 (8.1)−0.19 (−0.35 to −0.03)−0.38 (−0.71 to −0.05).02
Hyperactivity54.7 (11.4)50.9 (10.2)52.1 (11.4)48.4 (8.6)−0.32 (−0.50 to −0.13)−0.63 (−1.0 to −0.26).001
Aggression46.0 (8.2)44.4 (7.8)43.5 (5.6)42.4 (6.1)−0.18 (−0.31 to −0.06)−0.36 (−0.61 to −0.11).005
Externalizing Problems50.3 (9.6)47.3 (8.8)47.5 (8.4)44.9 (6.9)−0.27 (−0.42 to −0.12)−0.54 (−0.85 to −0.24)<.001
  • a Effect size represents average additive value of a single dose increment (ie, receipt of either VIP 0–3 or VIP 3–5 compared with receipt of neither or receipt of both compared with receipt of either) in SD units (Cohen’s d) on the basis of multiple linear regression, including linear term for number of possible doses (0, 1, or 2).

  • b Effect size for receipt of both VIP 0–3 and VIP 3–5 (double dose) compared with receipt of neither, in SD units (Cohen’s d), on the basis of multiple linear regression, with single and double dose dummy coded.

  • c P values were based on multiple regression analyses and Eq for estimates of increment per dose and of estimates of double dose.

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