Skip to main content

Table 3 Bivariate analysis of the associated factors according to the mistreatment status

From: Does the presence of siblings affect the results produced by a surveillance system of child mistreatment? Comparisons of several commonly-used statistical methods

Variables (n = 395) Logistic Logistic robust GEE GEE robust
OR (ES) (95 % CI) OR (ES) (95 % CI) OR (ES) (95 % CI) OR (ES) (95 % CI)
Gender P = 0.494 P = 0.502 P = 0.809 P = 0.838
 Girls 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
 Boys 1.15 (0.23) (0.77–1.71) 1.15 (0.24) (0.77–1.72) 0.96 (0.15) (0.70–1.31) 0.96 (0.18) (0.67–1.39)
  [Correlation matrix: 0.770]
Age P < 0.001 P < 0.001 P < 0.001 P < 0.001
 ≤3 years 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
 ≥4 years 3.42 (0.72) (2.26–5.18) 3.42 (0.76) (2.22–5.29) 2.40 (0.38) (1.76–3.29) 2.40 (0.53) (1.56–3.72)
  [Correlation matrix: 0.839]
Country of birth P < 0.001 P = 0.001 P = 0.001 P = 0.001
 Belgium 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
 Other country 2.58 (0.69) (1.53–4.36) 2.58 (0.76) (1.45–4.59) 2.28 (0.59) (1.38–3.77) 2.28 (0.59) (1.38–3.78)
  [Correlation matrix: 0.730]
Living environment P = 0.001 P = 0.006 P < 0.001 P < 0.001
 Elsewhere 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
 Family 3.34 (1.24) (1.61–6.92) 3.34 (1.48) (1.40–7.95) 4.72 (1.80) (2.23–9.99) 4.72 (2.21) (1.89–11.79)
  [Correlation matrix: 0.843]
Type of admission P = 0.004 P = 0.006 P = 0.006 P = 0.003
 Planned 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
 Emergency 2.17 (0.58) (1.29–3.65) 2.17 (0.61) (1.25–3.77) 2.12 (0.58) (1.24–3.62) 2.12 (0.54) (1.29–3.49)
  [Correlation matrix: 0.768]
Previous known case files P = 0.757 P = 0.795 P = 0.667 P = 0.686
 No 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
 Yes 0.94 (0.19) (0.63–1.40) 0.94 (0.23) (0.59–1.51) 0.91 (0.20) (0.60–1.39) 0.91 (0.21) (0.58–1.43)
  [Correlation matrix: 0.777]
  1. All values are vs. at risk of mistreatment. The “P” are the p values of the Wald tests
  2. The “Correlation matrix” is the estimated (exchangeable) within-sibship correlation matrix