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 18, Number 2—February 2012

Plesiomonas shigelloides Infection, Ecuador, 2004–2008

Juan C. Escobar, Darlene Bhavnani, Gabriel Trueba, Karina Ponce, William Cevallos, and Joseph EisenbergComments to Author 
Author affiliations: University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA (J. Eisenberg, D. Bhavnani); Universidad San Francisco de Quito, Quito, Ecuador (G. Trueba, W. Cevallos, K. Ponce, J.-C. Escobar)

Main Article


RRs and bootstrapped 95% CIs for single infections and co-infections with Plesiomonas shigelloides, Ecuador, 2004–2008*

Co-infection RRSingle P.shig (95% CI) RRCo-Infection (95% CI) RRCrude (95% CI) RRMH-Pooled (95% CI) Wald test for heterogeneity p value
Any pathogen 1.5 (0.9–2.2) 5.6 (3.5–9.3) 2.6 (1.9–3.5) 2.7 (1.9–3.6) 32.1 <0.001
Rotavirus 1.5 (0.9–2.2) 16.2 (5.5–62.3) 1.7 (1.1–2.5) 1.9 (1.2–2.9) 61.8 <0.001
Giardia spp. 1.5 (0.9–2.2) 2.1 (1.0–3.9) 1.5 (1.0–2.2) 1.6 (1.1–2.3) 1.3 0.2
Escherichia coli/ shigellae 1.5 (0.9–2.2) 13.8 (3.3–69.3) 1.6 (1.1–2.4) 1.7 (1.1–2.6) 32.8 <0.001

*RR, risk ratio. RRcrude = the unadjusted RR and RRMH-pooled is the pooled Mantel-Haenszel RR ratio estimate. The Wald test assesses whether the strata RRSingle P.shig and RRco-infection differ. Because of the clustered study design and the unequal sampling probabilities of controls, we chose not to use logistic regression models. Instead, we applied a nonparametric approach by using sampling weights to estimate RRs, as one would for a cohort study. We bootstrapped 1,000 samples from the original dataset, and with each new sample, we estimated the RR associated with single infection and co-infection. The lower 0.025 and upper 0.975 percentiles of the bootstrap distribution are reported as 95% CIs. Statistical analyses were conducted by using R version 2.11.1 (

Main Article

Page created: January 18, 2012
Page updated: January 18, 2012
Page reviewed: January 18, 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.