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