Table 1. Covariate associations with the seroprevalence of human cysticercosis, Tumbes - Peru, 1999.
| Variable | Positive | Tested | Prevalence | Prevalence ratio (PR) | p-value | Multivariate adjusted** | ||
| χ2 | PR | 95% CI | p-value*** | |||||
| Village | 0.593 | 0.624 | ||||||
| Tutumo | 24 | 118 | 20.3 | 1.00 | 1.00 | - | ||
| Leandro Campos | 18 | 83 | 21.7 | 1.07 | 1.09 | 0.59–2.03 | ||
| Nuevo Progreso | 33 | 147 | 22.4 | 1.10 | 0.79 | 0.47–1.33 | ||
| Matapalo | 59 | 239 | 24.7 | 1.21 | 0.79 | 0.45–1.39 | ||
| Isla Noblecilla | 12 | 47 | 25.5 | 1.26 | 0.91 | 0.45–1.86 | ||
| Quebrada Seca | 26 | 94 | 27.7 | 1.36 | 0.83 | 0.46–1.48 | ||
| Totora | 24 | 75 | 32.0 | 1.57 | 1.14 | 0.62–2.08 | ||
| Age (years) | 0.313 | 0.098 | ||||||
| 0–9 | 38 | 148 | 25.7 | 1.00 | 1.00 | - | ||
| 10–19 | 41 | 199 | 20.6 | 0.80 | 0.74 | 0.49–1.10 | ||
| 20–29 | 37 | 145 | 25.5 | 0.99 | 0.97 | 0.65–1.45 | ||
| 30–39 | 33 | 131 | 25.2 | 0.98 | 0.95 | 0.62–1.44 | ||
| 40–49 | 11 | 54 | 20.4 | 0.79 | 0.84 | 0.45–1.55 | ||
| 50–59 | 22 | 61 | 36.1 | 1.40 | 1.50 | 0.96–2.36 | ||
| 60+ | 14 | 65 | 21.5 | 0.84 | 0.71 | 0.42–1.19 | ||
| Gender | 0.584 | 0.370 | ||||||
| Female | 88 | 347 | 25.4 | 1.00 | 1.00 | - | ||
| Male | 108 | 456 | 23.7 | 0.93 | 0.89 | 0.69–1.15 | ||
| Owns pigs * | 0.143 | 0.716 | ||||||
| No | 36 | 119 | 30.3 | 1.00 | 1.00 | - | ||
| Yes | 146 | 611 | 23.9 | 0.79 | 0.93 | 0.63–1.38 | ||
| # pigs * | 0.241 | 0.846 | ||||||
| Doesn't own pigs | 36 | 119 | 30.3 | 1.00 | 1.00 | - | ||
| 1–3 (1st tertile) | 36 | 169 | 21.3 | 0.70 | 0.84 | 0.51–1.36 | ||
| 4–7 (2nd tertile) | 55 | 201 | 27.4 | 0.90 | 1.00 | 0.64–1.56 | ||
| >7 (3rd tertile) | 55 | 241 | 22.8 | 0.75 | 0.93 | 0.60–1.45 | ||
| % seropositive pigs * | <0.001 | 0.051 | ||||||
| Doesn't own pigs | 36 | 119 | 30.3 | 1.00 | 1.00 | - | ||
| < = 12.5% (1st tertile) | 41 | 208 | 19.7 | 0.65 | 0.78 | 0.51–1.21 | ||
| 13.3%–50.0% (2nd tertile) | 42 | 226 | 18.6 | 0.61 | 0.72 | 0.47–1.10 | ||
| >50.0% (3rd tertile) | 63 | 177 | 35.6 | 1.18 | 1.19 | 0.84–1.67 | ||
| Households within a 100 m radius | 0.010 | 0.323 | ||||||
| 1–3 (1st tertile) | 61 | 321 | 19.0 | 1.00 | 1.00 | - | ||
| 4–8 (2nd tertile) | 77 | 260 | 29.6 | 1.56 | 1.27 | 0.89–1.81 | ||
| >8 (3rd tertile) | 58 | 222 | 26.1 | 1.37 | 1.06 | 0.73–1.56 | ||
| Crowding (people/room) * | 0.896 | 0.256 | ||||||
| 0.3–1.2 (1st tertile) | 29 | 132 | 22.0 | 1.00 | 1.00 | - | ||
| 1.3–2.2 (2nd tertile) | 63 | 278 | 22.7 | 1.03 | 1.07 | 0.72–1.60 | ||
| >2.2 (3rd tertile) | 80 | 336 | 23.8 | 1.08 | 1.28 | 0.89–1.82 | ||
| Latrine in household * | 0.881 | 0.360 | ||||||
| No | 125 | 520 | 24.0 | 1.00 | 1.00 | - | ||
| Yes | 61 | 259 | 23.6 | 0.98 | 0.87 | 0.65–1.17 | ||
| Distance to nearest tapeworm carrier decreases by half | - | - | - | 1.12 | <0.001 | 1.10 | 1.05–1.15 | <0.001 |
| Harbors a Taenia solium tapeworm | <0.001 | 0.030 | ||||||
| No | 187 | 792 | 23.6 | 1.00 | 1.00 | - | ||
| Yes | 9 | 11 | 81.8 | 3.47 | 1.71 | 1.05–2.77 | ||
| Total | 196 | 803 | 24.4 | |||||
*: Information about pig rearing, crowding and latrine use was not obtained for all households.
**: Adjusted by the base 2 logarithm of the distance to the tapeworm and harboring a tapeworm.
***: Wald test.