Supplementary Table 3.
Results of sensitivity analysis with strategy of adjustment.
| Outcome | HPV infection status* OR, 95% CI | HPV subtype OR, 95% CI | HPV infection status OR, 95% CI* | HPV subtype OR, 95% CI* |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fitting by binary logistic regression model | 0.93 (0.82, 1.05) | 1.09 (0.93, 1.28) | 0.95 (0.86, 1.05) | 1.09 (0.96, 1.24) |
| Fitting by weighted two piecewise model | ||||
| Inflection point | 9.78 | 10.3 | 10.02 | 7.9 |
| <Inflection point | 0.83 (0.70, 0.98) | 1.07 (0.89, 1.28) | 0.89 (0.79, 1.00) | 0.76 (0.45, 1.29) |
| ≥Inflection point | 1.18 (0.91, 1.52) | 1.27 (0.70, 2.31) | 1.19 (0.93, 1.53) | 1.13 (0.99, 1.30) |
| Log likelihood ratio test | 0.037 | 0.597 | 0.048 | 0.155 |
*
Indicated the variable of “number of sexual partners in the past year” was included in model. We can observe that except for HPV genotype changes (because missing data is more obvious), the results of HPV infection status (infection/non-infection) have hardly changed (except for the credibility caused by excessive sample loss beyond widening). HPV – human papillomavirus; OR – odds ratio; CI – confidence interval.