Skip to main content
. 2011 May 27;4:94. doi: 10.1186/1756-3305-4-94

Table 2.

Socio-economic factors associated with pfcrt T76 mutation

Variable P.f n Pfcrt T76 n (%) OR 95% CI P value#
Age (years)
 ≤ 10 32 20 (63) 9.2 2.3-36.2 0.001
 >10 49 46 (94)
Sex
 Male 51 42 (82) 1.16 0.37-3.71 0.506
 Female 30 24 (80)
Residence
 Rural 66 54 (82) 1.12 0.07-4.6 0.56
 Urban 15 12 (80)
Household income
 High (≥ 100 US dollars/month) 11 6 (55) 5 1.3-19.5 0.027
 Low (< 100 US dollars/month) 70 60 (86)
Quality of housing*
 Good 71 57 (80) 2.21 0.25-18.92 0.408
 Bad 10 9 (90)
Clothes
 Long (covering arms and legs) 27 24 (89) 0.26 0.06-1.3 0.068
 Short 54 42 (78)
Insecticide spray
 Yes 28 19 (68) 3.7 1.16-11.86 0.025
 No 53 47 (89)
Using ITNs
 Yes 35 24 (69) 4.8 1.38-16.78 0.01
 No 46 42 (91)
Water stream (≤ 200 m of household)
 Yes 49 39 (80) 0.72 0.22-2.35 0.407
 No 32 27 (84)
Closing house windows
 Yes 35 28 (80) 1.18 0.38-3.66 0.492
 No 46 38 (83)

n: number of subjects

Confirmed as a significant risk factor by logistic regression

*Good housing condition was defined as being complete, made up of stones/bricks with no opening or holes. Bad housing condition did not have all these characteristics.