Table 3.
Logistic regression models for pacing presence (‘motor’ SB subcategory) 1.
| Independent Variables | Unadjusted Odds Ratio and p-Value | Adjusted Odds Ratio * | 95% CI * | p-Value * | Positively and Significantly Predicts Pacing? * (Result the Same if Age, Sex and Scanning Level not Controlled for?) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flipping presence vs. absence (rarely scanned group) |
0.33 (0.985) | 0.31 | 0.11–0.87 | 0.987 | No (Unadjusted relationship is also negative) |
| Flipping presence vs. absence (moderately scanned group) |
1.28 (0.261) | 1.07 | 0.49–2.34 | 0.436 | No (Unadjusted relationship is also positive and non-significant) |
| Flipping presence vs. absence (frequently scanned group) |
1.47 (0.201) | 1.29 | 0.52–3.20 | 0.289 | No (Unadjusted relationship is also positive and non-significant) |
| Twirling presence vs. absence | 3.23 (<0.001) | 1.66 | 0.48–5.70 | 0.210 | No (Unadjusted relationship is positive and significant) |
| Swinging presence vs. absence | 1.84 (0.005) | 0.77 | 0.32–1.83 | 0.723 | No (Unadjusted relationship is positive and significant) |
| Bouncing presence vs. absence | 0.69 (0.989) | 0.27 | 0.13–0.58 | 0.999 | No (Unadjusted relationship is also negative) |
| Head-twisting presence vs. absence | 4.77 (<0.001) | 2.89 | 0.96–8.73 | 0.029 | Yes (Unadjusted relationship is also positive and significant) |
| Rocking presence vs. absence (rarely scanned group) |
0.11 (0.999) | 0.12 | 0.03–0.49 | 0.998 | No (Unadjusted relationship is also negative) |
| Rocking presence vs. absence (moderately scanned group) |
0.41 (0.999) | 0.45 | 0.25–0.79 | 0.997 | No (Unadjusted relationship is also negative) |
| Rocking presence vs. absence (frequently scanned group) |
0.64 (0.883) | 0.66 | 0.32–1.36 | 0.871 | No (Unadjusted relationship is also negative) |
* Adjusted for sex, age, and scanning level. 1 One-tailed p-values are reported here. Significant p-values for adjusted positive relationships are bolded for emphasis.