Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2022 Sep 26.
Published in final edited form as: Respirology. 2019 Mar 5;24(7):638–645. doi: 10.1111/resp.13496

Table 4.

Results of multivariable negative binomial regression modelling of EPAC for all participants with diary card data (n = 861)

Characteristics Risk ratio (95% CI) P-value
Closing index 1.002 (0.65, 1.54) 0.994
Age (10-year units) 0.92 (0.85, 1.01) 0.067
Male (vs female) 0.76 (0.61, 0.95) 0.015
Black (vs white) 1.41 (1.13, 1.77) 0.002
Hispanic (vs white) 0.82 (0.58, 1.17) 0.277
Other race (vs white) 1.5 (0.92, 2.44) 0.101
Obese (vs not) 0.97 (0.77, 1.21) 0.792
Study, ref. = STAN
 CPAP 0.67 (0.47, 0.94) 0.021
 MeCIS 0.55 (0.31, 0.99) 0.046
 SARA 1.16 (0.86, 1.56) 0.347
 SARCA 1.26 (0.94, 1.7) 0.119

CPAP, Effect of Positive Airway Pressure on Reducing Airway Reactivity in Patients with Asthma; EPAC, episode of poor asthma control; MeCIS, Methacholine Bronchoprovocation – Influence of High-Potency Inhaled Corticosteroids in Asthma; SARA, Study of Acid Reflux and Asthma; SARCA, Study of Acid Reflux in Childhood Asthma; STAN, Study of Asthma and Nasal Steroids.