Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 May 1.
Published in final edited form as: Brain Behav Immun. 2016 Feb 9;54:226–232. doi: 10.1016/j.bbi.2016.02.008

Table 2.

Parameter estimates and standard errors for bivariate and final multivariate mixed models of predictors for IL-6.

Model
1		 Model
2		 Model
3		 Mode
l 4		 Model
5		 Model
6		 Mode
l 7		 Model
8		 Model
9
Fixed
effects 		Predictor
units
Intercept 0.035
(0.066)		 0.20
(0.074)		 0.035
(0.067)		 0.20
(0.10)		 −0.36
(0.17)		 0.028
(0.064)		 −0.20
(0.076
)		 0.033
(0.064)		 −0.26
(0.20)
Wave Each 6-
month
interval		 −0.05
(0.012)
Neuroticis
m		 Each point
(possible
range = 0.7
−3.6)		 −0.085
(0.13)
Sex Reference
= female		 −0.29
(0.13)		 −0.22
(0.12)
Age Each year
at study
entry		 0.028
(0.011)		 0.027
(0.011)
BMI Each log
unit		 2.62
(0.86)		 2.75
(0.86)
Statin use Reference
= no		 0.16
(0.090
)		 0.11
(0.087)
Stable
SRH		 Each unit
change in
scale (e.g.,
from good
to fair)		 −0.29
(0.074)		 −0.21
(0.073)
Dynamic
SRH		 Each unit
change in
scale (e.g.,
from good
to fair)		 0.006
(0.050)		 −0.004
(0.049)
Random
effects
Residual stable
(between-person)
variance		 0.46
(0.071)		 0.44
(0.072)		 0.46
(0.071)		 0.45
(0.069
)		 0.44
(0.068)		 0.42
(0.067)		 0.46
(0.072
)		 0.41
(0.064)		 0.35
(0.057)
Residual dynamic
(within-person)
variance		 0.54
(0.030)		 0.50a
(0.030)		 0.54
(0.030)		 0.54
(0.030
)		 0.54
(0.030)		 0.54
(0.030)		 0.53
(0.031
)		 0.53b
(0.031)		 0.54
(0.030)
Change in −2 log
likelihoodc 		−
24.46** 		−0.44 −
4.81* 		−6.13* −
9.05** 		−2.97 −
14.65** 		−
34.35**

Note. Interleukin-6 (IL-6) was log-transformed and standardized to Z-scores before analysis. The models are based on 769 observations except for Model 7 and 9, which include 738 observations and were compared to a Model 1 fit onto these observations (−2 LL = 1854.87). SRH = Self-rated health. BMI = Body Mass Index.

*

p < .05

**

p < .001

a

Variance in the effect of wave was included in the model (estimate = 0.003, SE = 0.002) but was statistically nonsignificant (p = .12)

b

Variance in the effect of dynamic SRH was included in the model (estimate = 0.01, SE = 0.029) but was statistically nonsignificant (p = .72)

c

Change in −2 log likelihood compared to Model 1 (−2 LL = 1930.7) when models were refit with maximum likelihood.