Table 1.
Electroclinical and demographic comparison of CFT groups
| Age (y) at first CFT | No. of CFT events (mean ± SEM, mode) | Male (no. [%]) | Female (no. [%]) | PHA (no. [%]) | PHX (no. [%]) | IED (no. affected/ total no. [%] | PS (no. affected/ total no. [%] | |
| CFT+Sz (n = 176) | 6 ± 5 | 568a (3 ± 3, 1) | 98 (55)b | 78 (46) | 107 (61) | 47 (26) | 35/49 (71)c | 19/49 (39)d |
| CFT/only (n = 515) | 7 ± 5 | 848a (2 ± 1, 1) | 211 (41)b | 265 (51) | 270 (65) | 155 (30) | 42/100 (42)c | 18/100 (18)d |
| Single CFT (n = 328) | 7 ± 5 | NA | 120 (37)e | 184 (56) | 172 (52) | 98 (29) | 21/55 (38) | 9/55 (16) |
| Multiple CFT (n = 177) | 7 ± 5 | NA | 91 (51)e | 79 (40) | 98 (55) | 56 (32) | 19/45 (42) | 9/45 (20) |
PHA, Papio h. anubis (olive baboons); PHX, Papio h. anubis × cynocephalus crosses (hybrid baboons); PS, photosensitivity, NA, not applicable.
Significant difference (PCFT+Sz – PCFTonly = 0.30, z = –11.0) in the anumber of lifetime CFT; prevalence of bmale baboons, cIED, and dPS; and eassociation of male sex with multiple lifetime CFT (P < 0.05, chi-square, 2-tailed).