+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Vitamin D deficiency & disease outcomes - assistance with interpretation of SPSS res

  1. #1
    Points: 26, Level: 1
    Level completed: 52%, Points required for next Level: 24

    Posts
    2
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Vitamin D deficiency & disease outcomes - assistance with interpretation of SPSS res




    Hello everybody!

    As part of my diploma work on the effects of vitamin D deficiency I'm incorporating results from a cross-sectional survey on a sample of approx 600 patients. Specifically, the authors investigated potential associations between disease states potentially related to vitamin D deficiency and vitamin D levels using logistic regression models where vitamin D levels were the independent and disease states the outcome variables.
    All analysis was run on IBM SPSS Statistics version 20. A two-sided p<0.05 was considered statistically significant.


    Now, my supervisor gave me these results and then decided to go on a long vacation... I've never interpreted results from any kind of statistical software before, and have almost no knowledge of statistics anyhow, so I'm asking you to please help me interpret these data.

    The first disease outcome is cardiovascular disease, and the results look like following:

    http://imgur.com/xwVkh3z #1

    http://imgur.com/Vou9b25 #2

    http://imgur.com/TXbWlT9 #3

    http://imgur.com/m7810Bs #4

    Now, I have tried to google this to the best of my ability, but some things that are unclear:

    - In #2 (which is supposed to be under "Variables not in the equation" from pic. #1), sig. is 0.012, which I understand is equivalent to p and since it is <0.05, I understand it means there is a significant association between vitamin D and cardiovascular disease? Furthermore, is there any importance to the "Score" value of 6.383?

    -about the Omnibus Tests of Model Coefficients in #3: do the scores themselves (e.g. chi-squared 6.880) have any significance, or is it only important that Sig. < 0.009?

    - about results in # 4: is it correct to interpret that since B = -0.033, that for every increase in unit (ng/ml) of vitamin D, the log odds of having cardiovascular disease decreases by 0.033?

    And finally, the other disease outcome is autoimmune disease:

    http://imgur.com/EeMpPC0 #5

    If I understand this correctly, Sig. (P) is 0.345, which is <0.05, so it is not significant, i.e. there is no significant association between vitamin D deficiency and autoimmune disease state?


    Sorry for the long post, but I'd be very grateful for your help Thank you in advance!

    /Rob

  2. #2
    Points: 26, Level: 1
    Level completed: 52%, Points required for next Level: 24

    Posts
    2
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Vitamin D deficiency & disease outcomes - assistance with interpretation of SPSS

    *Bump* any help?

  3. #3
    TS Contributor
    Points: 17,749, Level: 84
    Level completed: 80%, Points required for next Level: 101
    Karabiner's Avatar
    Location
    FC Schalke 04, Germany
    Posts
    2,540
    Thanks
    56
    Thanked 640 Times in 602 Posts

    Re: Vitamin D deficiency & disease outcomes - assistance with interpretation of SPSS


    You are correct with your assumptions that in the first anaylsis there is a
    significant negative association between vitamin D level and outcome
    and that there is no significant association in the second analysis.
    Personally I wouldn't interpret much more, since its just background
    information for your own study (if I understand you correctly).

    Just my 2pence

    K.

+ Reply to Thread

           




Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts






Advertise on Talk Stats