<p>I think that interpreting the results of statistical analyses is unambiguously a statistical question.  It's true that such results are basically always the output of some function from some statistical package, but that doesn't really change anything except the superficial aspects of the results.  That is, the meaning of regression results in Stata output is the same as in R output, and the statistics presented will typically be very similar.  I suspect that coming to understand how to interpret SAS's output should be sufficient, or nearly so, to interpret Minitab's output.  </p>

<p>Note further that we have a number of open (and in some cases, highly upvoted) threads about interpreting statistical output:  </p>

<ul>
<li><a href="https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/5135/interpretation-of-rs-lm-output">Interpretation of R&#39;s lm() output</a></li>
<li><a href="https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/90545/interpreting-principal-component-analysis-output?s=21|0.0000">Interpreting Principal Component Analysis output</a></li>
<li><a href="https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/200905/how-can-one-interpret-the-stata-output-for-multiple-correspondence-analysis">How can one interpret the Stata output for Multiple Correspondence Analysis?</a></li>
<li><a href="https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/53167/im-not-sure-how-to-interpret-my-binary-logistic-regression-output-from-spss">I&#39;m not sure how to interpret my binary logistic regression output from SPSS</a></li>
<li><a href="https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/96966/interpreting-lasso-tables-in-sas">Interpreting LASSO tables in SAS</a>  </li>
</ul>

<p>Etc.</p>

<p><strong>Therefore, I think questions about interpreting printouts from statistical packages are on-topic on CV.</strong>  </p>

<hr>

<p><em>Edit:</em> The meaning of elements of statistical output that are specific to a package but not to the analysis is ambiguous. If the question is just a read-the-documentation issue, it might be off topic both here and on Stack Overflow. On the other hand, the boundaries for what is on topic listed in our help center includes a vague line about "needing statistical expertise". Your question could be about reading the documentation, but where they aren't understandable without statistical expertise, and so on topic in that way.  (This would be analogous to questions like, 'I read such-and-such book, but I don't understand what they mean by this passage'.)  I am arguing here that questions about interpreting statistical output are on topic, <em>in general</em>, but that doesn't guarantee that all questions about interpreting statistical output must be on topic.  </p>
