Skip to main content

Table 4 Spearman’s rho bivariate analysis of vitamin D with fish and seafood

From: Determinants of vitamin D status among Black and White low-income pregnant and non-pregnant reproductive-aged women from Southeast Louisiana

 

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

1. Vit D (ng/mL)

Correlation Coefficient

1.000

       

Sig. (2-tailed)

.

       

2.Fatty fish consumption

in ounces Correlation

−0.118

1.000

      

Coefficient

0.111

.

      

Sig. (2-tailed)

        

3. Shrimp

Correlation Coefficient

−0.119

0.212b

1.000

     

Sig. (2-tailed)

0.125

0.006

.

     

4. Canned Tuna

Correlation Coefficient

−0.113

0.753b

0.284b

1.000

    

Sig. (2-tailed)

0.143

0.000

0.000

.

    

5. Crab

Correlation Coefficient

−0.022

0.244b

0.713a

0.280b

1.000

   

Sig. (2-tailed)

0.782

0.002

0.000

0.000

.

   

6. Catfish

Correlation Coefficient

−0.103

0.348b

0.304b

0.360b

0.262a

1.000

  

Sig. (2-tailed)

0.187

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.001

.

  

7. Crayfish

Correlation Coefficient

−0.036

0.386b

0.370a

0.325b

0.447a

0.199a

1.000

 

Sig. (2-tailed)

0.648

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.012

.

 

8. Tilapia

Correlation Coefficient

−0.096

0.517b

0.234b

0.403b

0.214b

0.377b

0.262b

1.000

Sig. (2-tailed)

0.220

0.000

0.002

0.000

0.007

0.000

0.001

.

  1. a Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)
  2. b Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)