Skip to main content

Table 3 Linear multilevel model results (N = 138)

From: Efficacy of affirmative cognitive behavioural group therapy for sexual and gender minority adolescents and young adults in community settings in Ontario, Canada

Variable

Fixed effects

Control (n = 41)

Intervention (n = 97)

Time

Condition

Time*

Condition

(95% CI)

Effect size (d)

Intercept

Slope (95% CI)

Intercept

Slope

(95% CI)

Depression

1.63

− 0.69

− 5.79**

(− 9.29, − 2.28)

0.56

40.22

1.63

(− 1.31, 4.56)

39.53

− 4.16***

(− 6.07, − 2.25)

SA—challenge

0.13

− 0.78

0.67***

(0.34, 1.01)

0.68

3.14

0.13

(− 0.15, 0.41)

3.06

0.80***

(0.62, 0.99)

SA—threat

0.03

− 0.14

− 0.43**

(− 0.69, − 0.17)

0.56

4.20

0.03

(− 0.18, 0.25)

4.06

− 0.39***

(− 0.53, − 0.25)

SA—resources

0.09

0.15

0.38*

(0.07, 0.69)

0.42

3.49

0.09

(− 0.17, 0.35)

3.64

0.47***

(0.31, 0.64)

Cope—active coping

− 0.06

− 0.01

0.18

(− 0.08, 0.45)

0.23

2.79

− 0.07

(− 0.29, 0.16)

2.78

0.12

(− 0.03, 0.26)

Cope—substance use

− 0.04

− 0.57**

− 0.02

(− 0.31, 0.27)

0.02

2.19

− 0.04

(− 0.28, 0.20)

1.62

− 0.06

(− 0.21, 0.10)

Cope—emotional support

− 0.11

− 0.38*†

0.59***

(0.28, 0.90)

0.65

2.89

− 0.11

(− 0.37, 0.16)

2.51

0.48***

(0.32, 0.65)

Cope—instrumental support

− 0.32*†

− 0.39*†

0.67***

(0.35, 1.00)

0.71

2.95

− 0.32*†

(− 0.59, − 0.04)

2.56

0.35***

(0.18, 0.53)

Cope—behavioural disengagement

− 0.07

− 0.16

− 0.16

(− 0.49, 0.17)

0.17

2.51

− 0.07

(− 0.34, 0.21)

2.35

− 0.23*

(− 0.41, − 0.05)

Cope—positive framing

− 0.18

− 0.44**†

0.59***

(0.30, 0.87)

0.70

2.74

− 0.18

(− 0.42, 0.06)

2.31

0.41***

(0.25, 0.56)

Cope—planning

− 0.18

− 0.11

0.49***

(0.23, 0.76)

0.64

2.89

− 0.18

(− 0.40, 0.04)

2.78

0.31***

(0.17, 0.46)

Cope—humour

− 0.13

− 0.41*†

0.36*

(0.07, 0.64)

0.43

2.96

− 0.13

(− 0.37, 0.11)

2.55

0.23**

(0.07, 0.38)

Cope—self-blame

− 0.10

− 0.27

− 0.20

(− 0.48, 0.08)

0.24

3.55

− 0.10

(− 0.34, 0.13)

3.28

− 0.30***

(− 0.45, − 0.15)

Reflective coping

− 0.07

− 0.04

0.27**

(0.07, 0.47)

0.46

2.81

− 0.07

(− 0.23, 0.10)

2.77

0.20***

(0.09, 0.31)

Hope—agency

− 0.04

− 0.10

0.84**

(0.37, 1.31)

0.61

4.58

− 0.04

(− 0.43, 0.36)

4.48

0.80***

(0.55, 1.06)

Hope—pathway

− 0.15

− 0.16

0.79**

(0.33, 1.25)

0.59

5.33

− 0.15

(− 0.53, 0.24)

5.17

0.64***

(0.40, 0.89)

  1. Age (centred by mean of the whole sample) was included in the model as a covariate variable. Cohen’s ds were estimated based on the t statistics of interaction terms (.2 = small; .5 = medium; .8 = large). All intercepts were significant at p < .001. *p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001. †Not significant after false discovery rate correction
Back to article page

BMC Psychology

ISSN: 2050-7283

Contact us