Skip to main content
. 2021 Feb 11;16(2):e0246736. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0246736

Table 8. Logistic regression analysis in identifying the associations between the difference of tribes and OF and/or DCIP positives.

Tribe Total n (%) OF/DCIP OR 95%CI p-value
Positive n (%) Negative n (%)
Total 1,200(100.0) 117 (9.8) 1,083(90.3)
    Akha 200 (16.7) 12 (6.0) 188 (94.0) 1.00
    Lahu 200 (16.7) 18 (9.0) 182 (91.0) 1.55 0.73–3.31 0.258
    Lisu 200 (16.7) 16 (8.0) 184 (92.0) 1.36 0.63–2.96 0.435
    Hmong 200 (16.7) 23 (11.5) 177 (88.5) 2.04 0.98–4.21 0.055
    Yao 200 (16.7) 21 (10.5) 179 (89.5) 1.84 0.88–3.85 0.106
    Karen 200 (16.7) 27 (13.5) 173 (86.5) 2.45 1.20–4.98 0.014*
Male 600 (100.0) 48 (8.0) 552 (92.0)
    Akha 100 (16.7) 4 (4.0) 96 (96.0) 1.00
    Lahu 100 (16.7) 9 (9.0) 91 (91.0) 2.37 0.71–7.98 0.162
    Lisu 100 (16.7) 6 (6.0) 94 (94.0) 1.53 0.42–5.60 0.519
    Hmong 100 (16.7) 8 (8.0) 92 (92.0) 2.09 0.61–7.17 0.243
    Yao 100 (16.7) 12 (12.0) 88 (88.0) 3.27 1.02–10.52 0.047*
    Karen 100 (16.7) 9 (9.0) 91 (91.0) 2.37 0.71–7.98 0.162
Female 600 (100.0) 69 (11.5) 531 (88.5)
    Akha 100 (16.7) 8 (8.0) 92 (92.0) 1.00
    Lahu 100 (16.7) 9 (9.0) 91 (91.0) 1.14 0.42–3.08 0.800
    Lisu 100 (16.7) 10 (10.0) 90 (90.0) 1.28 0.48–3.38 0.622
    Hmong 100 (16.7) 15 (15.0) 85 (85.0) 2.01 0.82–5.03 0.126
    Yao 100 (16.7) 9 (9.0) 91 (91.0) 1.14 0.42–3.08 0.800
    Karen 100 (16.7) 18 (18.0) 82 (82.0) 2.52 1.04–6.11 0.040*
Father/ Mother’s tribe
    Same 366 (30.5) 28 (7.7) 338 (92.3) 0.69 0.45–1.08 0.106
    Different 834 (69.5) 89 (10.7) 745 (89.3) 1.00
Paternal grandfather/grandmother’ s tribe s
    Same 1,070 (89.2) 108(10.1) 962 (89.9) 1.51 0.75–3.06 0.253
    Different 130 (10.8) 9 (6.9) 121 (93.1) 1.00
Maternal grandfather/grandmother’s tribe
    Same 98 (8.2) 15 (15.3) 83 (84.7) 1.77 0.99–3.19 0.056
    Different 1102 (91.8) 102 (9.3) 1,000(90.7) 1.00

* Significant level at α = 0.05.