. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Aug 1.

Published in final edited form as: Brain Behav Immun. 2016 Jan 14;56:221–229. doi: 10.1016/j.bbi.2016.01.014

Table 5. Co-Twin Control Analyses for Association Between Education and Allostatic Load.

	Allostatic Load	Allostatic Load	Allostatic Load
	(146 pairs)	(64 DZ pairs)	(81 MZ pairs)
	B	B	B
	(SE)	(SE)	(SE)
	p	p	p
Sex	.054	−.071	.129
	(.110)	(.159)	(.156)
	.621	.656	.407
Age	.041	.034	.047
	(.004)	(.006)	(.007)
	<.001	<.001	<.001
Education between-pair	−.075	−.081	−.066
Education between-pair	(.026)	(.035)	(.039)
	.004	.021	.089
Education within-pair	.000	.007	−.002
Education within-pair	(.038)	(.047)	(.057)
	.990	.886	.969

Note: MZ=monozygotic; DZ=dizygotic.

Shown are the regression coefficient, standard error, and p-value for each predictor. Allostatic load was log-transformed to normalize its distribution and was subsequently standardized for ease of interpretation. Sex was coded 1 for men and 2 for women. One twin pair of indeterminate zygosity was included in the full sample but not in the separate MZ or DZ analyses. Generalized Estimating Equations were used to account for the family structure.