<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Poisson Regression Interpretation in Statistical Procedures</title>
    <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Poisson-Regression-Interpretation/m-p/215852#M11701</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;"&lt;SPAN style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, 'Lucida Grande', sans-serif; background-color: #ffffff;"&gt;I know I can say that "the expected log count of absent days for female students is 0.52 units higher than male students", but how about the following alternative interpretation?:"&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;You are messed up with Odds Ratio . By that logic , You should take Logistic Model , not Possion Ression, unless P is very low .&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Let's take the link function of Logistic and Possion:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Logistic is&amp;nbsp; log( p /(1- p))&amp;nbsp; . Possion is log( count ). If p ~ 0 then&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; log( p /(1- p))&amp;nbsp; ~ log(p) =log(count/total)=log(count) - log(total) , that means if you want that explanation ,you should add an option&amp;nbsp; offset=log(total) into Model statement .&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Check this paper:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="http://support.sas.com/kb/24/188.html" title="http://support.sas.com/kb/24/188.html"&gt;24188 - Modeling rates and estimating rates and rate ratios (with confidence intervals)&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Therefore, Your &lt;SPAN style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, 'Lucida Grande', sans-serif; background-color: #ffffff;"&gt;alternative interpretation is right for such scenario .&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Xia Keshan&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Sat, 16 May 2015 06:53:44 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Ksharp</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2015-05-16T06:53:44Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Poisson Regression Interpretation</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Poisson-Regression-Interpretation/m-p/215851#M11700</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hello.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have a count variable (Y), say the number of absent days at school, and only 1 independent variable, X, say the gender of the student (X=1 if student is female).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If I run a Poisson regression to estimate the following model:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Log(E(Y))=beta*X&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I will get the estimate of beta, say 0.52&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;How do you interpret the estimate of beta?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I know I can say that "the expected log count of absent days for female students is 0.52 units higher than male students", but how about the following alternative interpretation?:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Since &lt;SPAN style="font-size: 13.3333330154419px;"&gt;&amp;nbsp; &lt;SPAN style="font-size: 13.3333330154419px;"&gt;Log(E(y|x=1) - &lt;SPAN style="font-size: 13.3333330154419px;"&gt; Log(E(y|x=0) =0.52&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 13.3333330154419px;"&gt;==&amp;gt; &lt;SPAN style="font-size: 13.3333330154419px;"&gt;Log[(E(y|x=1)/&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 13.3333330154419px;"&gt;(E(y|x=0)]=0.52&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 13.3333330154419px;"&gt;==&amp;gt; &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 13.3333330154419px; line-height: 1.5em;"&gt;E(y|x=1)/&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 13.3333330154419px; line-height: 1.5em;"&gt;(E(y|x=0)=exp(0.52)=1.68&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 13.3333330154419px; line-height: 1.5em;"&gt;or in other words, "the expected number of absent days for female students is 68% higher than the expected number of absent days for female students" Is it correct?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 16 May 2015 04:04:10 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Poisson-Regression-Interpretation/m-p/215851#M11700</guid>
      <dc:creator>niam</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-05-16T04:04:10Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Poisson Regression Interpretation</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Poisson-Regression-Interpretation/m-p/215852#M11701</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;"&lt;SPAN style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, 'Lucida Grande', sans-serif; background-color: #ffffff;"&gt;I know I can say that "the expected log count of absent days for female students is 0.52 units higher than male students", but how about the following alternative interpretation?:"&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;You are messed up with Odds Ratio . By that logic , You should take Logistic Model , not Possion Ression, unless P is very low .&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Let's take the link function of Logistic and Possion:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Logistic is&amp;nbsp; log( p /(1- p))&amp;nbsp; . Possion is log( count ). If p ~ 0 then&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; log( p /(1- p))&amp;nbsp; ~ log(p) =log(count/total)=log(count) - log(total) , that means if you want that explanation ,you should add an option&amp;nbsp; offset=log(total) into Model statement .&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Check this paper:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="http://support.sas.com/kb/24/188.html" title="http://support.sas.com/kb/24/188.html"&gt;24188 - Modeling rates and estimating rates and rate ratios (with confidence intervals)&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Therefore, Your &lt;SPAN style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, 'Lucida Grande', sans-serif; background-color: #ffffff;"&gt;alternative interpretation is right for such scenario .&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Xia Keshan&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 16 May 2015 06:53:44 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Poisson-Regression-Interpretation/m-p/215852#M11701</guid>
      <dc:creator>Ksharp</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-05-16T06:53:44Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Poisson Regression Interpretation</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Poisson-Regression-Interpretation/m-p/215853#M11702</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Xia, I don't have a rate, and I am not estimating the odds, &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I only have the count of absent days and the gender of the students.&amp;nbsp; I do not have the total school days and therefore cannot use the rate of absent days. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Look at this example&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A class="active_link" href="http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/sas/output/sas_negbin_output.htm" title="http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/sas/output/sas_negbin_output.htm"&gt;Annotated SAS Output: Negative Binomial Regression&amp;nbsp; &lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;In the example of the link, can I use my alternative method of interpretation for female variable? &lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 16 May 2015 15:02:26 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Poisson-Regression-Interpretation/m-p/215853#M11702</guid>
      <dc:creator>niam</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-05-16T15:02:26Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Poisson Regression Interpretation</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Poisson-Regression-Interpretation/m-p/215854#M11703</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Your interpretation is correct!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The count is in average 1.68 higher for x=1 than for x=0.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The term "poisson regression" is also used for estimating rate-ratios (since the likelood function is the same as for truly poisson distributed observations), here the interpretation is different. But I dont think that you are in that case, unless you look on "time-to-first-absent-day".&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 16 May 2015 22:00:22 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Poisson-Regression-Interpretation/m-p/215854#M11703</guid>
      <dc:creator>JacobSimonsen</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-05-16T22:00:22Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Poisson Regression Interpretation</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Poisson-Regression-Interpretation/m-p/328655#M17331</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Thank you. I have been struggling with how to present the expected log count in my results. Converting to a percent seems perfect for making the results accessible. Can you help me recreate this:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Since &lt;SPAN&gt;&amp;nbsp; Log(E(y|x=1) - Log(E(y|x=0) =0.52&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;==&amp;gt; Log[(E(y|x=1)/(E(y|x=0)]=0.52&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;==&amp;gt; &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;E(y|x=1)/&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;(E(y|x=0)=exp(0.52)=1.68&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;I just don't know how to plug in my numbers (beta = .80, beta = .28, beta = .008) to find the percent. Is there a tool I can use or an explanation of the steps in the equation above?&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2017 07:33:02 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Poisson-Regression-Interpretation/m-p/328655#M17331</guid>
      <dc:creator>Gold</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-01-31T07:33:02Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Poisson Regression Interpretation</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Poisson-Regression-Interpretation/m-p/329080#M17367</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Poisson really doesn't lead to a percentage (see&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://communities.sas.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/18408"&gt;@Ksharp&lt;/a&gt;'s post about logistic regression if that is what you want). &amp;nbsp;It is for counts (or rates calculated with an offset). &amp;nbsp;Why not just present the expected count numbers?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Steve Denham&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2017 13:26:45 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Poisson-Regression-Interpretation/m-p/329080#M17367</guid>
      <dc:creator>SteveDenham</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-02-01T13:26:45Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Poisson Regression Interpretation</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Poisson-Regression-Interpretation/m-p/329091#M17375</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Yes, thank you. I don't know why I became so fixated on trying to make sense of the expected log counts when I have ratios to compare ecpected counts.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2017 13:52:20 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Poisson-Regression-Interpretation/m-p/329091#M17375</guid>
      <dc:creator>Gold</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-02-01T13:52:20Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

