Unravelling the complex nature of resilience factors and their changes between early and later adolescence

Fritz, J.; Stochl, J.; Fried, E. I.; Goodyer, I. M.; van Borkulo, C. D.; Wilkinson, P. O.; van Harmelen, A.-L.

doi:10.1186/s12916-019-1430-6

Table 4 RF and general distress comparisons: age 14 versus age 17

From: Unravelling the complex nature of resilience factors and their changes between early and later adolescence

	CA	Age 14	Age 17	V	95% CI^*1	p^*2	age_xCA^*3	age_xCA p
Friendship support (high)	Yes	0.09	0.07	102,800	− .04 to .08	.55	− .09	.63
Friendship support (high)	No	0.23	0.30	55,837	− .13 to − .00	.08
Family support (high)	Yes	− 0.02	− 0.07	109,330	.00 to .12	.07	− .03	.81
Family support (high)	No	0.17	0.14	64,965	− .03 to .09	.49
Family cohesion (high)	Yes	− 0.10	− 0.18	110,280	.01 to .14	.06	− .08	.63
Family cohesion (high)	No	0.29	0.29	61,400	− .08 to .06	.76
Negative self-esteem (low)	Yes	0.06	0.10	90,292	− .19 to − .01	.07	− .22	.13
Negative self-esteem (low)	No	0.29	0.55	41,185	− .43 to − .24	< .001
Positive self-esteem (high)	Yes	− 0.08	− 0.14	108,460	− .00 to .11	.09	− .07	.63
Positive self-esteem (high)	No	0.21	0.23	59,923	− .09 to .04	.49
Ruminative brooding (low)	Yes	0.03	− 0.07	116,300	.05 to .16	< .01	− .03	.81
Ruminative brooding (low)	No	0.19	0.12	71,074	.02 to .14	< .05
Reflective rumination (low)	Yes	0.10	− 0.08	130,350	.14 to .26	< .001	.01	.96
Reflective rumination (low)	No	0.20	0.00	82,603	.14 to .27	< .001
Distress tolerance (high)	Yes	− 0.06	0.02	81,643	− .11 to − .04	< .001	− .09	.63
Distress tolerance (high)	No	0.25	0.42	36,790	− .20 to − .13	< .001
Aggression (low)	Yes	Low: 498 (=1)	Low: 491 (=1)	7138		.59	1.22	.63
	Yes	High: 133 (=0)	High: 140 (=0)	7138		.59	1.22	.63
	No	Low: 440 (=1)	Low: 425 (=1)	2438		.18
	No	High: 59 (=0)	High: 74 (=0)	2438		.18
Expressive suppression (low)	Yes	Low: 418 (=1)	Low: 396 (=1)	9333		.14	1.01	.96
	Yes	High: 213 (=0)	High: 235 (=0)	9333		.14	1.01	.96
	No	Low: 371 (=1)	Low: 355 (=1)	4375		.21
	No	High: 128 (=0)	High: 144 (=0)	4375		.21
General distress	Yes	− 0.09	− 0.09	106,940	− .02 to .22	.14	.27	.13
General distress	No	− 0.40	− 0.68	79,608	.22 to .46	< .001

Note. CA childhood adversity. All RFs are scored in such a way that high values are protective (e.g. high levels of high friendship support or high levels of low negative self-esteem) and low values are harmful (e.g. low levels of high friendship support or low levels of low negative self-esteem). The continuous general distress variable is scored in such a way that the higher the value the higher the level of general distress. ^*1The confidence interval (CI) for the difference in location estimates, corresponding to the alternative hypothesis. ^*2Please note the p values are corrected for the false discovery rate, which is why the CIs do not have to contain 0 for the p value to be nonsignificant. ^*3For linear models the interaction is reported as b value and for binomial logit models as odds ratio

Back to article page

ISSN: 1741-7015

Contact us

Submission enquiries: bmcmedicineeditorial@biomedcentral.com
General enquiries: info@biomedcentral.com

BMC Medicine

Contact us