TABLE 7.

Multivariable analysis of the brucellosis risk factors among the study respondents (N = 180) in Sericho and Isiolo Central divisions, Isiolo County in 2014

Explanatory Variables	Adjusted odds ratio (95% CI)	p value
(a) The two variables taken together with household size considered as confounder and location as random effect.
Household size considered as binary variable (i.e. ≤ or > median of 6)
Assisting with calving	1.47 (0.97–2.24)	0.07
Households drinking raw milk	1.36 (0.91–2.05)	0.13
Household size considered as numerical variable (based on quartiles)
Assisting with calving	1.45 (0.95–2.21)	0.08
Households drinking raw milk	1.37 (0.91–2.07)	0.13
(b) Each variable taken separately with the household size considered as confounder and location as random effect.
Household size considered as binary variable (i.e. ≤ or > median of 6)
Assisting calving	1.62 (1.09–2.43)	0.02
Households drinking raw milk	1.53 (1.04–2.25)	0.03
Household size considered as numerical variable (based on quartiles)
Assisting calving	1.61 (1.07–2.40)	0.02
Households drinking raw milk	1.54 (1.04–2.27)	0.03