Table 4.
|
β-HCH |
β-HCH |
β-HCH |
|||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(Area 1–4) |
(Area 4) |
(Area 1–3) |
||||
GMR | 95%CI | GMR | 95%CI | GMR | 95%CI | |
Sex | ||||||
Males |
1.00 |
|
1.00 |
|
1.00 |
|
Females |
1.20 |
0.98-1.47 |
1.17 |
0.84-1.65 |
1.30 |
1.03-1.63 |
Age group (years) | ||||||
25-34 |
1.00 |
|
1.00 |
|
1.00 |
|
35-44 |
1.34 |
0.99-1.80 |
1.28 |
0.77-2.13 |
1.56 |
1.12-2.17 |
45-54 |
1.92 |
1.40-2.62 |
1.56 |
0.94-2.58 |
2.48 |
1.75-3.53 |
55-64 |
2.76 |
2.04-3.74 |
2.51 |
1.52-4.13 |
3.51 |
2.49-4.95 |
Level of Education | ||||||
Primary school |
1.00 |
|
1.00 |
|
1.00 |
|
Secondary school |
0.78 |
0.62-0.98 |
0.81 |
0.54-1.21 |
0.81 |
0.64-1.02 |
University degree |
0.86 |
0.57-1.29 |
0.91 |
0.41-1.99 |
0.93 |
0.63-1.37 |
Area of residence* | ||||||
Area 1 |
1.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
Area 2 |
0.98 |
0.68-1.41 |
|
|
|
|
Area 3 |
1.32 |
0.91-1.93 |
|
|
|
|
Area 4 |
2.00 |
1.36-2.94 |
|
|
|
|
Any use of well water | ||||||
No |
1.00 |
|
1.00 |
|
1.00 |
|
Yes |
1.42 |
1.08-1.88 |
1.46 |
0.97-2.20 |
1.42 |
0.97-2.08 |
Provenience of food§ | ||||||
Commercial |
1.00 |
|
1.00 |
|
1.00 |
|
Local |
1.16 |
0.89-1.52 |
1.75 |
0.97-3.18 |
1.00 |
0.78-1.29 |
Own production |
1.26 |
0.94-1.69 |
2.27 |
1.24-4.13 |
0.75 |
0.55-1.01 |
Consume of Beef§ | ||||||
None/commercial |
1.00 |
|
1.00 |
|
1.00 |
|
Local |
0.91 |
0.61-1.35 |
0.84 |
0.50-1.43 |
0.81 |
0.36-1.83 |
Own production |
1.88 |
1.35-2.63 |
1.67 |
1.09-2.57 |
dropped |
|
Consume of Chickens§ | ||||||
None/commercial |
1.00 |
|
1.00 |
|
1.00 |
|
Local |
1.08 |
0.72-1.60 |
1.06 |
0.56-1.98 |
1.33 |
0.73-2.43 |
Own production | 1.36 | 0.99-1.85 | 1.63 | 1.04-2.55 | 0.67 | 0.36-1.83 |
*Area 1: reference; Area 2: Colleferro urban/rural; Area 3: industrial; Area 4: river.
GMR: Geometric Mean Ratio from multivariate linear regression model.
95%CI: 95% Confidence Intervals.
§ the model with the variables consume of beef and consume of chicken is alternative to the model with the variable provenience of food.