Skip to main content

Table 4 Model results and fit between outcomes and adjusted and unadjusted models

From: Can we prepare healthcare professionals and students for involvement in stressful healthcare events? A mixed-methods evaluation of a resilience training intervention

Outcome AIC Variance R2M R2C Predictor Contrast β 95% CI
Unadjusted models
 Confidence
n of obs. = 206
673 \( {\sigma}_u^2 \) = 0.72 47% 69% Time T2 v T1 2.43 2.08–2.79
  \( {\sigma}_e^2 \) = 1.03     T3 v T1 2.81 2.42–3.21
  ICC = 0.41     T3 v T1 2.75 2.31–3.19
 Knowledge
n of obs. = 127
374 \( {\sigma}_u^2 \) = 0.27 23% 42% Time T2 v T1 1.14 0.82–1.46
  \( {\sigma}_e^2 \) = 0.83       
  ICC = 0.24       
 Resilience
n of obs. = 144
788 \( {\sigma}_u^2 \) = 15 8% 75% Time T3 v T1 2.77 1.82–3.73
  \( {\sigma}_e^2 \) = 5.73     T4 v T1 2.54 1.45–3.62
  ICC = 0.72       
Models adjusted for age/gender
 Confidence adj.
n of obs. = 203
663 \( {\sigma}_u^2 \) = 0.69 48% 69% Time T2 v T1 2.41 2.06–2.77
  \( {\sigma}_e^2 \) = 1.03     T3 v T1 2.79 2.40–3.19
  ICC = 0.40     T4 v T1 2.72 2.27–3.16
     Age 0.01 −0.01-0.04
     Gender M v F −0.52 −1.20-0.17
 Knowledge adj.
n of obs. = 124
365 \( {\sigma}_u^2 \) = 0.26 23% 41% Time T2 v T1 1.09 0.77–1.41
  \( {\sigma}_e^2 \) = 0.81    Age 0.01 −0.01-0.03
  ICC = 0.24    Gender M v F 0.00 −0.56-0.55
 Resilience adj.
n of obs. = 142
775 \( {\sigma}_u^2 \) = 14.2 14% 75% Time T3 v T1 2.76 1.81–3.71
  \( {\sigma}_e^2 \) = 5.71     T4 v T1 2.57 1.49–3.66
  ICC = 0.71    Age −0.09 −0.18-0.00
     Gender M vs. F 2.20 −0.60-5.01
  1. Notes. Likelihood ratio tests for all random effects p < .001