Skip to main content

Table 3 Comparison of cantons with regard to ecological data, as a function of presence/absence in each identified high-incidence cluster and after the exclusion of patients with a known potential confounding factor

From: Spatial analysis of hypospadias cases in northern France: taking clinical data into account

  Neutral cantons Cluster #1 (North-West) Cluster #2 (Center-East) p
N = 127 N = 24 N = 19
French EDI 0.52 [0.44;0.65] 0.47 [0.42;0.55] 0.69 [0.56;0.73] 0.001
Percentage of artificialized area 0.17 [0.07;0.48] 0.10 [0.04;0.22] 0.53 [0.38;0.64] < 0.001
Percentage of rural area 0.83 [0.52;0.93] 0.90 [0.78;0.96] 0.47 [0.36;0.62] < 0.001
Percentage of agricultural area 0.56 [0.23;0.70] 0.85 [0.66;0.92] 0.47 [0.34;0.54] < 0.001
Distance to CWIP (km) 14.4 [7.92;23.6] 12.8 [8.55;16.3] 4.92 [2.85;9.62] < 0.001
  1. Note: CWIP closest waste incineration plant, EDI Ecological Deprivation Index. Statistical comparisons were performed using the Kruskal Wallis test. All results are quoted as the median [IQR]