Table 1
Descriptive characteristics of the single-case to normative controls. Note. BDI = Beck Depression Inventory; STAI-Trait = State-Trait Anxiety Inventory – Trait version.
| Normative sample | Bayesian probability | Bayesian estimated percentage | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M | SD | Case’s score | Probability (two-tailed) | Point | 95% CI | |
| Age | 28.57 | 1.68 | 29 | .81 | 59.61 | 39.55 − 77.85 |
| BDI | 6.00 | 7.73 | 12 | .47 | 76.77 | 57.44 − 91.04 |
| STAI-Trait | 37.14 | 13.03 | 57 | .17 | 91.87 | 77.51 − 98.82 |
Table 2
Case-controls score on hair loss. Note: A bold font emphasizes a significant difference between DC and the normative sample.
| Normative sample | Bayesian probability | Bayesian estimated percentage | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M | SD | Time | Case’s score | Probability (two-tailed) | Point | 95% CI | |
| %Hair Loss | 9.36 | 7.01 | Baseline | 92.5 | < .001 | 99.99 | 99.90 – 100 |
| Post-treatment | 40 | .011 | 99.44 | 99.31 –100 | |||
| Six-month | 12.5 | .67 | 66.40 | 46.17 – 83.49 | |||
Figure 1
Changes in Hair Loss Severity as a function of Time. Note: The broken line depicts the mean score of the normative sample; the red “X” indicates that the case exhibits a deficit as compared to the normative sample; the green “v” indicates a significant restoration of this deficit.
Table 3
Case-controls scores on mindfulness. Note: A bold font emphasizes a significant difference between DC and the normative sample.
| Condition | Normative sample | Bayesian probability | Bayesian estimated percentage | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M | SD | Time | Case’s score | Probability (two-tailed) | Point | 95% CI | |
| Observing | 23.86 | 6.25 | Baseline | 31 | .29 | 85.64 | 68.09 – 96.31 |
| Post-treatment | 30 | .36 | 82.17 | 63.79 – 4.40 | |||
| Six-month Follow-up | 32 | .23 | 88.58 | 72.30 – 97.61 | |||
| Describing | 26.00 | 1.59 | Baseline | 23 | .04 | 4.40 | 0.31 – 15.44 |
| Post-treatment | 28 | .24 | 87.84 | 71.26 – 97.29 | |||
| Six-month Follow-up | 29 | .12 | 94.18 | 81.66 – 99.42 | |||
| Acting with awareness | 20.43 | 4.33 | Baseline | 27 | .16 | 91.79 | 77.45 –98.79 |
| Post-treatment | 25 | .33 | 83.75 | 65.50 – 95.39 | |||
| Six-month Follow-up | 26 | .23 | 88.33 | 71.95 – 97.55 | |||
| Nonreactivity to inner experience | 23.64 | 4.89 | Baseline | 11 | .02 | 1.26 | 0.01 – 6.59 |
| Post-treatment | 24 | .94 | 52.81 | 33.37 – 71.89 | |||
| Six-month Follow-up | 28 | .40 | 79.92 | 60.98 – 93.13 | |||
| Nonjudgement of inner experience | 25.14 | 7.14 | Baseline | 21 | .58 | 29.18 | 13.14 – 49.10 |
| Post-treatment | 26 | .91 | 54.57 | 34.95 – 73.38 | |||
| Six-month Follow-up | 31 | .44 | 77.98 | 58.54 – 91.98 | |||
| FFMQ score total | 119.07 | 19.64 | Baseline | 113 | .77 | 38.58 | 20.73 –58.69 |
| Post-treatment | 133 | .50 | 74.93 | 55.36 – 89.78 | |||
| Six-month Follow-up | 146 | .20 | 89.78 | 74.23 – 98.11 | |||
Figure 2
Changes in Mindfulness Facets as a function of Time. Note: The broken line depicts the mean score of the normative sample; the red “X” indicates that the case exhibits a deficit as compared to the normative sample; the green “v” indicates a significant restoration of this deficit.