Test scores were statistically corrected for age and education and standardized on the NC group [mean and standard deviation for NC group: Z=0±1], allowing direct comparisons across groups and across tests. Where higher raw scores indicated worse performance, scores were multiplied by −1, so that lower Z scores always indicated worse performance. Theoretically-derived composite scores were then calculated as the mean of all Z-scores of tests comprising each of 6 functional domains: Attention/Working Memory, Production, Immediate Memory, Delayed Memory, Visuospatial Construction, and Upper Limb Motor Function. Analysis of variance (MANOVA and ANOVA) tested group differences on the composite scores between ALC and NC and among the 3 alcohol-related Caine subgroups. Follow-up t-tests examined 2 group comparisons for significant omnibus results. Correlational analyses tested relations between composite scores and demographic, alcohol consumption, neurological, and dietary variables in the ALC group. Multiple regression analyses sought unique predictors of cognitive and motor composites.
