From: The Environment and Children’s Health Care in Northwest China
Outcome | Predictor (comparison group) | Odds of one point increase in category (95% CI) |
---|---|---|
Number of affected children | Shaanxi providers (compared with Gansu providers) | 2.83 (1.91, 4.19) |
Number of affected children | Ningxia providers (compared with Gansu providers) | 2.59 (1.55, 4.34) |
Number of affected children | Training in previous environmental history taking | 2.04 (1.24, 3.36) |
Number of referrals | Xinjiang providers (compared with Gansu providers) | 0.29 (0.14, 0.58) |
Number of referrals | Training in previous environmental history taking | 2.20 (1.35, 3.59) |
Own environmental health book | Shaanxi providers (compared with Gansu providers) | 3.42 (1.57, 7.44) |
Own environmental health book | Xinjiang providers (compared with Gansu providers) | 43.3 (13.2, 142) |
Own environmental health book | Specialty providers (compared with primary care providers) | 0.17 (0.08, 0.38) |
Own environmental health book | Training in previous environmental history taking | 2.41 (1.02, 5.67) |
Environmental health training | Xinjiang providers (compared with Gansu providers) | 2.64 (1.30, 3.81) |
Environmental health training | Specialty providers (compared with primary care providers) | 2.91 (1.08, 7.81) |
Environmental health training | Percent public patients | 0.99 (0.97, 0.997) |