TABLE 3.
B/γ | SE | t | p | ||
Model 1 | Percent rice | 0.41 | 0.11 | 3.90 | 0.001 |
Model 2 | Percent rice | 0.39 | 0.10 | 3.69 | 0.002 |
SES | 0.02 | 0.02 | 1.14 | 0.254 | |
Model 3 | Percent rice | 0.39 | 0.11 | 3.56 | 0.003 |
SES | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.78 | 0.437 | |
Age | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.99 | 0.323 | |
Model 4 | Percent rice | 0.33 | 0.11 | 2.90 | 0.010 |
SES | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.55 | 0.586 | |
Age | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.89 | 0.377 | |
Modernization | Province GDP per capita | 0.20 | 0.11 | 1.83 | 0.078 |
Model 5 | Percent rice | 0.33 | 0.12 | 2.78 | 0.005 |
SES | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.92 | 0.356 | |
Age | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.31 | 0.760 | |
Pathogen | Province pathogen prevalence | –0.05 | 0.06 | –0.86 | 0.390 |
We generated generalized linear mixed-models in R with the lme4 package (Bates et al., 2015). Participants were grouped at the province level. The province GDP per capita and province pathogen data are consistent with Table 1.