Table 1

Beta coefficients and Odds ratios for the final model.
Type of variable Beta coefficients Odds ratios
Median 95% CI 90% CI Median 95% CI 90% CI
Intercept −1.07 [−1.53, -0.64] [−1.42, -0.73] 0.34 [0.22, 0.53] [0.24, 0.48]
Proportion of cattle farms becoming bTB positive from 2005 to 2006 (%) QS 0.62(a)(b) [0.06, 1.22] [0.18, 1.09] 1.86(a)(b) [1.06, 3.39] [1.19, 2.97]
Mean number of hunting seasons in which the hunting estates of the municipality have been inspected QS 0.55(a)(b) [0.09, 1.02] [0.19, 0.91] 1.73(a)(b) [1.09, 2.77] [1.21, 2.49]
Apparent TB prevalence in wild boars in the municipality in the game season 2006-07 QS 0.66(a)(b) [0.18, 1.28] [0.27, 1.14] 1.94(a)(b) [1.20, 3.59] [1.32, 3.11]
Number of sampled cattle in the cattle farms included in the sanitary plan in 2006 QS 0.61(b) [−0.05, 1.30] [0.10, 1.14] 1.85(b) [0.96, 3.66] [1.10, 3.13]
Number of cattle farms with at least one bTB-positive animal in 2006 QS 0.66(b) [−0.04, 1.38] [0.11, 1.22] 1.94(b) [0.96, 3.98] [1.11, 3.40]
Number of “TB-positive” red deers in the municipality in the game season 2006-07 QS 0.53(b) [−0.08, 1.22] [0.05, 1.06] 1.69(b) [0.93, 3.38] [1.05, 2.90]
Proportion of cattle farms classified as extensive beef breeding farms in 2006 (%) QS 0.39(b) [−0.09, 0.87] [0.01, 0.76] 1.47(b) [0.92, 2.39] [1.02, 2.14]
Number of farms devoted to bullfighting cattle in 2006 QS 0.14 [−0.24, 0.56] [−0.16, 0.47] 1.15 [0.79, 1.76] [0.85, 1.60]

(QS) = quantitative standardized variable; (D) = dichotomous variable (codified considering the median).

(a): Significant coefficients of the final model using the 95% CI.

(b): Significant coefficients of the final model using the 90% CI.

Rodríguez-Prieto et al.

Rodríguez-Prieto et al. BMC Veterinary Research 2012 8:148   doi:10.1186/1746-6148-8-148

Open Data