Skip to main content
. 2020 Oct 27;10:18358. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-74655-z

Table 2.

Univariable logistic regression analyses of the main statistical values between sociodemographic or behavioral variables among women and each type of vaginal microbiota evaluated in this study.

Type of vaginal microbiota Sociodemographic or behavioral variables P-value OR 95% CI Adjusted P-value
Healthy microbiota Occupation
Unprofessional 0.020* 0.38 0.17–0.86 0.060
Sexual partner
Having 0.020* 1.64 1.08–2.47 0.020*
Birth control methods
Hormonal contraception 0.040* 2.03 1.03–3.99 0.160
Intermediate microbiota Sexual partner
Having 0.015* 0.45 0.24–0.86 0.015*
Contraceptive use
Yes 0.003** 0.38 0.20–0.72 0.003**
Birth control methods
Condom 0.008** 0.31 0.13–0.74 0.032*
Hormonal contraception 0.021* 0.18 0.04–0.77 0.042*
Aerobic vaginitis Age
Over 50 0.026* 4.46 1.20–16.66 0.104
Coinfections Occupation
Unprofessional 0.026* 4.88 1.21–19.63 0.078
Civil status
Free union 0.000*** 16.65 3.63–76.28 0.000***

Univariable logistic regression analyses were conducted to examine how different subcategories (independent variables) were associated with the presence of each type of vaginal microbiota (dependent variables) in each category. The following subcategories of each category were used as reference for statistical analysis: Under 20 in Age; University in Education Level; Student in Occupation; Single in Civil Status; Not Having in Sexual Partner; No in Contraceptive Use; None or Don’t answer in Birth Control Methods. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) obtained as measurements of relative risks and the assessments of independent risk factors for vaginal infection establishment. A value of P < 0.05 and 95% confidence intervals were considered significant for the test: *P ≤ 0.05; **P ≤ 0.01; ***P ≤ 0.001. N/d non-determined. All initial values of P < 0.05 obtained by univariable logistic regression analyses were then evaluated through Benjamini–Hochberg (BH) adjustment to detect false discovery rate (FDR) for conducting multiple comparisons. These P-values evaluated by BH adjustment were illustrated in the table as adjusted P-values.