Table 4.
(a) Association of antibody to rabies virus infection positives and explanatory variables (p ≤ 0.3) at dog, owner, and ecological level, Moshi, Tanzania. (b) The final logistic regression models for rabies virus infection by dog, owner, and ecological level, Moshi, Tanzania.
| (a) | ||||
| Variable | Category | Odds Ratio | 95% CI | p-Value |
| Gender/sex of the dog | Female versus male | 0.71 | 0.37–1.37 | 0.30 |
| Age of animal | Young versus adult (over 6 months) | 1.65 | 0.33–8.19 | 0.54 |
| Park/Game reserve available in the vicinity | Available versus not available | 0.64 | 0.28–1.46 | 0.29 |
| Proportion of dogs and cats in the household livestock population | <50% versus ≥50% | 1.71 | 0.92–3.18 | 0.09 |
| New dog or cats # | No new introduction versus New introduction | 0.84 | 0.45–1.58 | 0.59 |
| Livestock observed mixed with wildlife 1 | No versus Yes | 2.73 | 0.80–9.34 | 0.11 |
| Total household population (humans) | >5 persons versus ≤5 persons | 1.76 | 0.88–3.48 | 0.11 |
| Sighted wild animals in the vicinity | No versus Yes | 0.89 | 0.45–1.78 | 0.75 |
| Level of education (head of household) | Secondary or above versus Up to primary | 0.71 | 0.38–1.33 | 0.28 |
| Shelter for dogs at night | No versus Yes | 1.46 | 0.66–3.24 | 0.35 |
| Household members aware of rabies | No versus Yes | 1.10 | 0.27–4.41 | 0.89 |
| Household members have knowledge of rabies | No versus Yes | 2.14 | 0.69–6.67 | 0.19 |
| Animals in the household previously affected by rabies | No versus Yes | 0.87 | 0.39–1.95 | 0.73 |
| Know that rabies affects humans | No versus Yes | 1.01 | 0.49–2.08 | 0.99 |
| Household member was previously affected by rabies | No versus Yes | 0.31 | 0.07–1.40 | 0.13 |
| Aware of transmission of rabies | No versus Yes | 0.77 | 0.38–1.56 | 0.47 |
| Household member was previously bitten by rabies | No versus Yes | 0.49 | 0.17–1.38 | 0.18 |
| Aware of community member bitten by a dog | No versus Yes | 1.04 | 0.50–2.15 | 0.92 |
| Report previous incidence known | No versus Yes | 1.07 | 0.31–3.71 | 0.91 |
| Observed dog roaming | No versus Yes | 1.93 | 0.78–4.77 | 0.15 |
| Own dog scavenged | No versus Yes | 2.13 | 0.85–5.33 | 0.11 |
| (b) | ||||
| Variable * | Z-Score | Odds Ratio | 95% CI | p-Value |
| Dogs and cats are more than 50% of the household livestock population | 2.45 | 2.24 | 1.17–4.28 | 0.01 |
| Livestock (dog & cats) observed to mix with wildlife | 1.96 | 3.62 | 1.00–13.13 | 0.05 |
(a) 95% CI = 95% Confidence interval; # new dogs or cats were introduced through births, new purchases or gifts; 1 Wildlife sighted includes the following: fox, hyena, komba, squirrel (vicheche), leopard, mangrove, wild dogs, monkeys, impala (swala), warthog, and rabbits. (b) Hosmer-Lemeshow Goodness of fit χ2 = 6.96; p-value = 0.92; AIC (Akaike Information Criterion) = 245.13; BIC (Bayesian Information Criterion) = 254.84. * Offset variable was a combination of eco-epidemiological variables: (Vicinity to National park, Forest Reserve, Game Reserve, Game-controlled Area, and River Reserve).