Table 5.
Multiple logistic regression analyses (comparing children with and without varicella vaccination or measles vaccination, respectivelya) | Varicella Vaccination | Measles Vaccination | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Munich (2009–2011) OR (95% CI) |
Würzburg (2009–2011) OR (95% CI) |
Munich (2009–2011) OR (95% CI) |
Würzburg (2009–2011) OR (95% CI) |
|
Nb = 885 | Nb = 1019 | N = 931 | N = 1065 | |
Physician recommended varicella vaccination vs. no recommendation | 19.71 (13.57–28.63)e | 34.66 (22.59–53.18)e | N/Ac | N/Ac |
Survey year | ||||
2010 vs. 2009 (reference) | 1.68 (1.08–2.60)g | 1.59 (0.98–2.56) | – | 1.09 (0.61–1.93) |
2011 vs. 2009 (reference) | 1.60 (1.03–2.47)g | 1.78 (1.08–2.94)g | – | 2.01 (1.03–3.90)g |
Attendance of childcare unit >10 h/week vs. no or less frequent attendance | 1.52 (1.05–2.22)g | – | 1.97 (1.28–3.03)f | 1.78 (1.03–3.10)g |
Highest possible school educationd at least one parent | – | – | – | 0.50 (0.29–0.85)g |
Private health insurance vs. statutory health insurance | – | – | 0.64 (0.41–1.01) | – |
Model building approach was an automated forward-selection procedure using Likelihood ratios and a 10%-significance level as entry criterion. Only variables that fulfilled the entry criterion are displayed
a: all vaccination data refers to first dose
b: only children susceptible at the age of 11 months
c: only collected regarding recommendation of varicella vaccination
d: university entrance diploma at end of grammar school (‘Abitur’)
e: significant at 0.1% level
f: significant at 1% level
g: significant at 5% level