<?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: pairwise comparison of interaction term in ancova (unequal slopes) in Statistical Procedures</title>
    <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/pairwise-comparison-of-interaction-term-in-ancova-unequal-slopes/m-p/63816#M3027</link>
    <description>The theory underlying the Tukey test doesn't translate to the case of a continuous covariate.  I'm not sure that the others do either (though looked at the original papers of some of them).&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
You can, in GLM, test the pairwise comparisons using the CONTRAST statements and address multiple comparisons using Bonferroni.&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
You can use the CONTRAST statement to examine the regression lines as well.&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
Doc Muhlbaier&lt;BR /&gt;
Duke</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 May 2011 02:14:53 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Doc_Duke</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2011-05-10T02:14:53Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>pairwise comparison of interaction term in ancova (unequal slopes)</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/pairwise-comparison-of-interaction-term-in-ancova-unequal-slopes/m-p/63815#M3026</link>
      <description>Hello&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
I have run an ancova to test if the slopes of my regression lines were different and they were.  Where I am stuck is that the pairwise comparison of the interaction term isn't being allowed since the independent variable isn't a class variable (lsmeans x*covariate/ adjust=tukey pdiff).&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
Can anyone help me perform pairwise comparisons on the interaction term please?&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
Also is there a way to test if each of the different regression lines that are created by the covariate are different from 0 in the ancova design instead of running separate regressions?&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
Thanks!</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 May 2011 22:30:20 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/pairwise-comparison-of-interaction-term-in-ancova-unequal-slopes/m-p/63815#M3026</guid>
      <dc:creator>magsbennett</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-05-09T22:30:20Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: pairwise comparison of interaction term in ancova (unequal slopes)</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/pairwise-comparison-of-interaction-term-in-ancova-unequal-slopes/m-p/63816#M3027</link>
      <description>The theory underlying the Tukey test doesn't translate to the case of a continuous covariate.  I'm not sure that the others do either (though looked at the original papers of some of them).&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
You can, in GLM, test the pairwise comparisons using the CONTRAST statements and address multiple comparisons using Bonferroni.&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
You can use the CONTRAST statement to examine the regression lines as well.&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
Doc Muhlbaier&lt;BR /&gt;
Duke</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 May 2011 02:14:53 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/pairwise-comparison-of-interaction-term-in-ancova-unequal-slopes/m-p/63816#M3027</guid>
      <dc:creator>Doc_Duke</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-05-10T02:14:53Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: pairwise comparison of interaction term in ancova (unequal slopes)</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/pairwise-comparison-of-interaction-term-in-ancova-unequal-slopes/m-p/63817#M3028</link>
      <description>You can reparameterize the model to easily get what you want.&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
Let y be response.&lt;BR /&gt;
Let a be the categorical predictor with 3 levels.&lt;BR /&gt;
Let x be the continuous predictor.&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
In this parameterization, the interaction a*x gives you a test of whether slopes are equal:&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
proc glimmix data=your_data;&lt;BR /&gt;
class a;&lt;BR /&gt;
model y = a x a*x / solution;&lt;BR /&gt;
run;&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
This parameterization reports the intercept and the slope estimates for the linear regression each level of a:&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
proc glimmix data=your_data;&lt;BR /&gt;
class a;&lt;BR /&gt;
model y = a a*x / noint solution;&lt;BR /&gt;
  /* Pairwise comparison among slopes, with stepdown Bonferroni adjustment */&lt;BR /&gt;
estimate "Slope A1 versus A2" a*x 1 -1 0,&lt;BR /&gt;
  "Slope A1 versus A3" a*x 1 0 -1,&lt;BR /&gt;
  "Slope A2 versus A3" a*x 0 1 -1&lt;BR /&gt;
  / adjust=bon stepdown;&lt;BR /&gt;
run;&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
Check the GLIMMIX documentation for details, including ADJUST= alternatives. I haven't tested this code so there could be syntax errors.&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
The book by Milliken and Johnson (Analysis of Messy Data, Vol III: Analysis of Covariance) covers ANCOVA extensively. I think there's also info in Littell et al. (SAS System for Mixed Models, 2nd ed).&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
Have fun!&lt;BR /&gt;
Susan

In the second parameterization, the fixed-effects solutions will report tests of whether estimates are zero--in other words, whether each intercept or slope is equal to zero.&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
    &lt;BR /&gt;
Message was edited by: Susan</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 May 2011 03:21:21 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/pairwise-comparison-of-interaction-term-in-ancova-unequal-slopes/m-p/63817#M3028</guid>
      <dc:creator>Susan</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-05-10T03:21:21Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

