Table 3

Descriptive analyses for Kaohsiung elderly (n = 4,993)

Variable

Mean (Std Dev)

t-value [F-value]

p-value

Scheffe's


Gender+: Female

9.07(1.63)

13.02

< .0001

Male

9.60(1.12)

Education++: Grade School or below (1)

9.26(1.47)

[60.55]

< .0001

High School (2)

9.80(0.76)

College or above (3)

9.81(0.89)

Marital Status+: Married

9.52(1.18)

-10.13

< .0001

Unmarried

9.04(1.70)

Perceives positive support+: Yes

9.46(1.24)

-4.60

< .0001

No

9.23(1.56)

Lives alone+:

Yes

9.39(1.37)

-0.45

0.66

No

9.36(1.39)

Feels lonely+

Strong (1)

9.49(1.25)

[33.16]

< .0001

1>2

Some (2)

9.32(1.36)

1>3

Little (3)

8.81(1.95)

2>3

Religion++

Buddhist (1)

9.32(2.04)

[7.94]

< .0001

5>1

Traditional (2)

9.27(1.35)

5>2

Christian (3)

9.58(0.95)

Catholic (4)

9.49(1.45)

Other (5)

9.63(1.02)

Occupation++

White collar (1)

9.82(0.66)

[41.59]

< .0001

1>4; 1>2

Blue collar (2)

9.41(1.39)

1>6; 1>3

Farmer (3)

8.73(1.92)

4>6; 4>3

Prof-Admin (4)

9.56(1.14)

5>6; 5>3

Retired (5)

9.55(1.17)

2>6; 2>3

Housewife (6)

9.10(1.58)

6>3

Reported Health Conditions+

Stroke: Yes

8.66(2.26)

4.12

< .0001

No

9.38(1.36)

Hypertension: Yes

9.44(1.23)

-3.03

< .0001

No

9.32(1.49)

Cancer: Yes

9.82(0.39)

-6.09

< .0001

No

9.36(1.41)

Diabetes: Yes

9.37(1.31)

-0.14

0.89

No

9.36(1.42)

Heart Disease: Yes

9.52(1.24)

-2.21

0.03

No

9.35(1.42)

Parkinson's: Yes

8.00(2.56)

1.84

0.09

No

9.36(1.40)

Depression: Yes

8.17(2.04)

2.03

0.07

No

9.36(1.41)

Vision problem: Yes

9.10(1.79)

2.62

0.01

No

9.38(1.38)

Hearing problem: Yes

9.55(1.41)

-1.26

0.21

No

9.36(1.06)

Dental problem: Yes

9.35(1.49)

0.07

0.94

No

9.36(1.41)

ADL+++

-0.27

< .0001

IADL+++

-0.38

< .0001

Age+++

-0.20

< .0001


1. Higher ADL or IADL scores indicate more functional dependence. 2. +t-statistic used to compare mean SPMSQ scores in 2 groups defined by dichotomous covariates. 3. ++ANOVA used to test the differences in variance of SPMSQ scores among multiple groups. 4. +++Correlation analysis was used. 5. Statistical significance is being assessed at the 0.05 levels.

Yeh and Liu BMC Health Services Research 2003 3:9   doi:10.1186/1472-6963-3-9

Open Data