Table 2

Vorige Start Omhoog Volgende

Meta-Analyses of Sample-Level Effect Sizes Assessing CSA-Adjustment Relations in Junior and Senior High School Students

[Page 737]

 

Symptom class/level

k

N

ru

95% CI

Chi2

runw

Emotional problems

         

 

  All 14         .17
  All (w/o KFW) 13 18,146 .13 .12 - .15 74.40* .14
  Male 4 4,029 .09 .06 - .12 19.32* .13
  Female 6 7,517 .15 .12 - .17 35.74* .16

Behavioral problems

           
  All 20         .17
  All (w/o KWF) 19 151,820 .11 .11 - .12 81.41* .14
  Male 7 70,859 .11 .11 - .12 37.81* .15
  Female 9 74,261 .11 .10 - .11 40.35* .13

Note

CSA = child sexual abuse;
k = number of effect sizes (samples);
N
= total number of participants in the k samples;
ru = unbiased effect size estimate (positive values indicate better adjustment for control participants);
CI = confidence interval for ru;
Chi2 = within-group homogeneity statistic (based on dl = k -1);
runw = unweighted mean effect size. "AIl' indicates all samples were used, including Kendall-Tackett et al. (1993), in which some data were missing and statistics could not be computed, as indicated by blank spaces;
"AIl (w/o KWF)" indicates all samples were used except for KendaIl-Tackett et al. (1993).
* p < .05, indicating non-homogeneity of effect sizes.

Vorige Start Omhoog Volgende