Table 2

Statistical analysis of Study 2 scores of wellbeing (Winter 2002–2003).

Intent-to-treat analysis

Per-protocol analysis



Dose of Vitamin D

N

Age

N

mcg/day (IU/day)

Total in group, (% female)

yr (SD)

25(OH)D nmol/L (SD)

December

2002 Score

(out of 16)

February

2003

Score

(out of 16)

Total in group,

(% female)

December

2002 Score

(out of 16)

February

2003 Score

(out of 16)


CONTINUERS FROM STUDY 1 (on Vit D since previous year)

15 (600)

22 (77%)

54 (14)

69 (26)

7.2 (4.5)

4.4 (3.4)

15 (73%)

6.9 (4.8)

4.4 (3.4) b

100 (4000)

24 (84%)

56 (9)

126 (45) a

4.4 (4.4) a

4.0 (3.7)

16 (88%)

4.6 (4.6)

4.0 (3.7)

NEW PATIENTS FOR STUDY 2

15 (600)

33 (68%)

48 (13)

39 (9)

8.0 (5.2)

5.4 (4.3)

25 (64%)

8.7 (5.5)

5.4 (4.3) b

100 (4000)

33 (85%)

50 (14)

39 (9)

8.4 (5.5)

3.9 (3.6) c

26 (89%)

8.1 (5.6)

3.9 (3.6) bc


a Different from 15 mcg (600 IU)/day group (the value above the mean marked by this footnote) by t-test p < 0.04; lower (better) than in the 600 IU/day group by Mann-Whitney p = 0.039.

b Paired t-test, December score vs February Score (the value to the left of the mean marked by this footnote) p < 0.012; also significant by the non-parametric equivalent to paired t-test, the Wilcoxan test, p < 0.012.

c For New patients, low vs high dose group, 2-tail unpaired t test p = 0.188; Mann-Whitney p = 0.183; i.e. not significantly different.

Vieth et al. Nutrition Journal 2004 3:8   doi:10.1186/1475-2891-3-8

Open Data