[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

From |
Jason Davis <jason_davis@umail.ucsb.edu> |

To |
statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |

Subject |
Re: st: Interpretation of log transformed variables in logistic regression? |

Date |
Fri, 06 Feb 2009 17:48:22 -0800 |

Thank you Austin, Martin and Massimo-

Ciao, Jason Quoting Austin Nichols <austinnichols@gmail.com>:

Jason Davis <jason_davis@umail.ucsb.edu>: A one-unit increase in log income is a 172% increase in income, which you estimate increases the odds of birth fivefold (a one-unit increase in log income increases log odds by 1.68 so a one-percent increase in income, or increase in log income of .01, increases log odds by .0168). If the odds of birth are .0204 at mean income, a one-percent increase in income increases them to .0207 or so, according to your estimates. You have bigger problems--income is not exogenous, so an exogenous increase in income might in fact have a very different causal impact on the odds of birth than the one you estimate. Perhaps even a negative impact, rather than a positive one.On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 10:19 AM, Jason Davis<jason_davis@umail.ucsb.edu> wrote:I can use some help with this one. I have run a multivariate logistical regression with log transformed continuous variables, non-transformed continous variables, and some categorical variables. The DV is birth outcome in a given year (yes/no) and the IV of interest is income (log transformed). The results are in odds ratios. My confusion is how do I interpret the odds ratio of the log transformed continous variable. Specifically, the odds ratio of log income is 5.4. If I back transform this I get 1.68. This does not seem right, as a $1 increase in income would raise the odds of giving birth in a given year by 68%. This would mean $1,000 raise would increase the odds by 0.68*1000 or a 680% increase in the odds of giving birth. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.* * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/

-- Jason Davis PhD candidate in Geography University of California, Santa Barbara jason_davis@umail.ucsb.edu * * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/

**References**:**st: Interpretation of log transformed variables in logistic regression?***From:*Jason Davis <jason_davis@umail.ucsb.edu>

**Re: st: Interpretation of log transformed variables in logistic regression?***From:*Austin Nichols <austinnichols@gmail.com>

- Prev by Date:
**st: Stirling's approximation** - Next by Date:
**Re: st: Fw: gllamm for simultaneous equation model with panel data** - Previous by thread:
**Re: st: Interpretation of log transformed variables in logistic regression?** - Next by thread:
**st: Scatter plot with marker labels: unexpected result** - Index(es):

© Copyright 1996–2016 StataCorp LP | Terms of use | Privacy | Contact us | What's new | Site index |