Dear all users,
I am interested to examine the effect of emotional IPV on ANC visits differ by women educational status or not.
Outcome variable: (adequate ANC service (1) or inadequate ANC service (0))
Main exposures: spousal emotional IPV (Yes/No or 1/0)
Moderators: (Education status) - Lower education (1) & Higher education (2).
Hypothesis 1:
The effect of emotional IPV on adequate ANC services will be moderated by education and wealth.
I have fitted the model using the following commands:
xtmelogit anc_adequacy i.emotional_viol1##1.educ_mom i.age_catgorey i.husband_educ i.wealth_hh i.mediae_expo i.dma i.birth_order i.V102 i.contextual_regions || psu :,or nolog
Output:
Mixed-effects logistic regression Number of obs = 2,863
Group variable: psu Number of groups = 618
Obs per group:
min = 1
avg = 4.6
max = 12
Integration points = 7 Wald chi2(17) = 263.01
Log likelihood = -1571.0285 Prob > chi2 = 0.0000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
anc_adequacy | Odds Ratio Std. Err. z P>|z| [95% Conf. Interval]
-------------------------------+----------------------------------------------------------------
emotional_viol1 |
Yes | 1.154874 .4641096 0.36 0.720 .525366 2.538676
|
educ_mom |
Primary or no education | .6540172 .13108 -2.12 0.034 .4415592 .9687003
|
emotional_viol1#educ_mom |
Yes#Primary or no education | .6461428 .2718937 -1.04 0.299 .2832351 1.474042
Note: results of all other covariates excluded
Therefore, there is no main effect of emotional violence (p = 0.720) on ANC and statistical insignificant interaction on this model between emotional IPV and low education (p = 0.299), while adjusted for all covariate. But using these same variables the model fitted without interaction terms found that the effect of emotional IPV (p= 0.021) on ANC visits depends on women’s low education. Here, the commands and the finding using stat 16:
. xtmelogit anc_adequacy emotional_viol1 i.age_catgorey i.husband_educ i.wealth_hh i.mediae_expo i.birth_order i.dma i.V102 i.contextu al_regions if educ_mom==1 || psu :,or nolog
d-effects logistic regression Number of obs = 2,548
Group variable: psu Number of groups = 580
Obs per group:
min = 1
avg = 4.4
max = 12
Integration points = 7 Wald chi2(15) = 160.53
Log likelihood = -1384.4623 Prob > chi2 = 0.0000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
anc_adequacy | Odds Ratio Std. Err. z P>|z| [95% Conf. Interval]
-------------------------------+----------------------------------------------------------------
emotional_viol1 | .7387078 .0969917 -2.31 0.021 .571098 .9555089
|
age_catgorey |
25 – 34 | 1.433873 .2368658 2.18 0.029 1.037285 1.982089
35 – 49 | 1.446263 .3013516 1.77 0.077 .9613604 2.175748
My question is why these two models finding vary? Is there any mistakes I have made in the commands to fit the models? If not, both the main effects and interaction terms are insignificant, why the stratified analyses become sig. for the main effect emotional IPV (p = 0.021)? Why the number of participants are different (2863 vs. 2548) in the two models?
Thank you so much in advance for your quick responses.
Related Posts with Main effects significance and Interaction terms using logistic regression in stat 16
Type mismatchI keep getting a 'type mismatch' error and I'm stumped. All feedback would be greatly appreciated! …
Need help on comparing variables accross t-testsI need help conducting t-tests with variables that have 2 things inside of them. For example, If I t…
Kaplan Meyer CurveHello, I am working on a survival analysis paper and one of the reviewers has asked me to add censor…
merge when value of one variable in dataset 1 matches either value of two variables in dataset 2Hi, I'm trying to merge two datasets by phone number. In dataset 1, each observation only has one ph…
Regression discontinuity, revising/improving code from version 8.2 for version 15.1I came across a clear introduction to regression discontinuity in chapter 16 of Khandker, Shahidur R…
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 Response to Main effects significance and Interaction terms using logistic regression in stat 16
Post a Comment