Skip to main content
. 2017 May 25;17:508. doi: 10.1186/s12889-017-4435-0

Table 2.

Negative binomial spatial regression analyses of incident Tuberculosis case rates

Variable/Indicator Null model Null spatial model Bivariate models Multivariable model
Log Population Densitya 0.95 [0.85–1.06]
Log Mean Monthly Incomea 0.66 [0.57–0.77]
Literacy rate 0.40 [0.22–0.72] 0.59 [0.44–0.80]
Mean household size 1.94 [1.25–3.03]
Electricity connectivity 0.05 [0.01–0.17]
Water supply 0.92 [0.80–1.07]
Garbage collection 0.65 [0.50–0.85]
Sewerage coverage 1.00 [0.97–1.04] 1.05 [1.02–1.08]
AIDS rateb 1.01 [0.93–1.10]
Homicide rateb 1.16 [1.07–1.25] 1.08 [1.01–1.16]
Proportion of population white 0.87 [0.80–0.94]
Proportion of population black 1.20 [1.12–1.30] 1.12 [1.03–1.21]
Proportion of population yellow 1.04 [0.96–1.12]
Proportion of population brown 1.13 [1.04–1.23]
Proportion of population indigenous 1.05 [0.97–1.13]
District I - -
District II 0.78 [0.51–1.18]
District III 0.81 [0.58–1.13]
District IV 0.72 [0.50–1.08]
District V 0.72 [0.48–1.11]
District VI 0.77 [0.51–1.24]
Deviance Information Criterion 1137.3 1109.5 1065.5
Spatial variance 0.117 0.031
Non-spatial variance 0.025 0.015 0.012
Spatial variance ratio 0.88 0.73
Global Moran’s I 0.33 0.11 0.11
Global Moran’s I p-value 0.00 0.03 0.03

Values are incidence rate ratios and 95% confidence intervals associated with a 10 percentage point change in the value of each covariate, with the exceptions of log values (a: one log change), incidence rates (b: one standard deviation change) or indicators for District (difference relative to District I). Model diagnostics not shown for the 16 bivariate models; bivariate model for District contained five indicator variables