Skip to main content
. 2017 Oct 9;11(10):e0005925. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0005925

Table 3. Bivariate analysis of geographic risk factors (n = 1,086 individuals).

Exposure variable n Frequency of tungiasis Presence of tungiasis Presence of severe Tungiasis
(> 30 lesions)
(%) any (%) heavy OR (95% CI) P value OR (95% CI) P value
Location
Malanga Sublocationa Mtoroni 116 7.8 0.9 Reference
Yembe 27 59.3 3.7 17.29 (6.20–48.23) <0.0001 4.42 (0.27–73.05) 0.2987
Kadzitsoni 133 33.8 3.8 6.08 (2.82–13.12) <0.0001 4.49 (0.52–30.02) 0.1732
Chembe 76 10.5 0.0 1.40 (0.51–3.80) 0.5106 0.50 (0.02–12.52) 0.6754
Bahati 17 64.7 0.0 21.80 (6.53–72.74) <0.0001 2.20 (0.09–56.17) 0.6334
Kakuyuni Sublocation Kakuyuni 324 35.5 7.4 6.54 (3.19–13.40) <0.0001 9.20 (1.23–68.80) 0.0306
Goshi 221 19.9 2.7 2.96 (1.39–6.30) 0.0050 3.21 (0.38–26.98) 0.2831
Vihingoni 172 13.4 2.3 1.84 (0.82–4.12) 0.1416 2.74 (0.30–24.81) 0.3704

a The village with the lowest prevalence was used as reference.