Skip to main content
. 2022 May 9;16(5):e0009849. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0009849

Table 4. Comparison between stunted children and controls for the presence of bacterial diarrheagenic agents in fecal samples.

% for controls (N = 264) % for MS = (N = 104) % for SS = (N = 96) P-value*
Salmonella spp. 7.95 (N = 21) 5.21 (N = 5) 12.5 (N = 12) 0.13
Shigella spp. 80.68 (N = 213) 90.38 (N = 94) 84.38 (N = 81) 0.07
ETEC estIa 4.17 (N = 11) 5.77 (N = 6) 6.25 (N = 6) 0.66
ETEC eltB 29.92 (N = 79) 40.38 (N = 42) 32.29 (N = 31) 0.15
EPEC bfpA 13.26 (N = 35) 11.54 (N = 12) 18.75 (N = 18) 0.29
EPEC eae 37.50 (N = 99) 36.54 (N = 38) 36.46 (N = 35) 0.97
EAEC aggR 31.06 (N = 82) 27.88 (N = 29) 29.17 (N = 28) 0.82
EAEC aaiC 17.80 (N = 47) 25.96 (N = 27) 22.92 (N = 22) 0.18
Campylobacter jejuni/coli 14,39 (N = 38) 11,54 (N = 12) 13.54 (N = 13) 0.77

%: percentage; N: total number of sample analysis; MS: moderately stunted; SS: severely stunted;

Comparisons between groups (controls and stunted children MS+SS) were determined using Pearson’s χ2-test or Fisher’s exact test, as appropriate. Only values with p < 0.05 could be considered to be statistically significant*.