Table A1.
Chi-square table used to analyze if there were any statistical differences in prevalences across the six locations accessed by Skuballa et al. [19] (O—observed, E—expected, p—prevalence, df—degrees of freedom).
| Positive Cases of B. burgdorferi (s.l.) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Geographical Area (Type) | n | O | E | O-E | (O-E)2/E | p |
| Hamburg (urban) | 41 | 4 | 6 | −1.849 | 0.58277 | 0.0980 |
| Berlin (urban) | 19 | 2 | 3 | −0.724 | 0.19274 | 0.1050 |
| Munich (urban) | 24 | 3 | 3 | −0.434 | 0.05495 | 0.1250 |
| Lake Constance (rural) | 6 | 2 | 1 | 1.141 | 1.51682 | 0.3333 |
| Upper-Rhine Valley (rural) | 24 | 5 | 3 | 1.606 | 0.75063 | 0.2100 |
| Rhine Valley-Main Area (rural) | 54 | 8 | 8 | 0.265 | 0.00906 | 0.1480 |
| Total | 168 | 24 | 24 | 3.11 | 0.1431 | |
| Negative Cases of B. burgdorferi (s.l.) | ||||||
| Geographical Area (Type) | n | O | E | O-E | (O-E)2/E | p |
| Hamburg (urban) | 41 | 37 | 35 | 1.9 | 0.10 | 0.9024 |
| Berlin (urban) | 19 | 17 | 16 | 0.7 | 0.03 | 0.8947 |
| Munich (urban) | 24 | 21 | 21 | 0.4 | 0.01 | 0.8750 |
| Lake Constance (rural) | 6 | 4 | 5 | −1.1 | 0.25 | 0.6667 |
| Upper-Rhine Valley (rural) | 24 | 19 | 21 | −1.6 | 0.12 | 0.7917 |
| Rhine Valley-Main Area (rural) | 54 | 46 | 46 | −0.3 | 0.00 | 0.8519 |
| Total | 168 | 144 | 144 | 0.51 | 0.8569 | |
| Statistical Results | ||||||
| df | 5 | |||||
| Obtained Chi-square | 3.621 | p-value = 0.605163 | ||||
| Critical Chi-square | 11.07 | critical p-value = 0.05 | ||||