Skip directly to site content Skip directly to page options Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link
Volume 11, Number 8—August 2005
Research

Sheep Feed and Scrapie, France

Sandrine Philippe*, Christian Ducrot†, Pascal Roy‡, Laurent Remontet‡, Nathalie Jarrige*, and Didier Calavas*Comments to Author 
Author affiliations: *Agence Française de Sécurité Sanitaire des Aliments, Lyon, France; †Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, Theix, France; ‡Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire Lyon-Sud, Lyon, France

Main Article

Table 2

Multivariate analysis of potential confounding factors

Factors Modalities* No. controls (%) No. cases (%) Log-linear model
OR† 95% CI
Flock size <133* 100 (29) 11 (12) 1.0
133–236 87 (25) 24 (25) 2.5 1.1 – 5.5
237–366 77 (22) 33 (35) 4.0 1.8 – 8.6
>366 86 (25) 26 (28) 3.0 1.3 – 7.0
Type of flock Dairy* 229 (65) 64 (68) 1.0
Meat 113 (32) 27 (29) 1.0 0.3 – 3.2
Mixed 8 (2) 3 (3) 1.2 0.3 – 5.5
Intensification criteria None* 241 (69) 56 (60) 1.0
Production monitoring 38 (11) 16 (17) 1.8 0.8 – 3.8
Involvement in a breeding scheme 71 (20) 22 (23) 1.1 0.6 – 2.1

*Reference modality.
†OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.

Main Article

Page created: April 23, 2012
Page updated: April 23, 2012
Page reviewed: April 23, 2012
The conclusions, findings, and opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.
file_external