Skip to main content

Table 2 Odds ratios for each protective practice separately

From: Protective practices against tick bites in Denmark, Norway and Sweden: a questionnaire-based study

 

Being over 50 years

Being female

Not having higher education a

Being from Sweden

Not living in a NUTS 2 where the capital city is located

Having experienced one or more tick bites

Using long trousers and long-sleeved clothes

1.44 (1.24–1.68)

NS

NS

1.53 (1.31–1.78)

NS

1.37 (1.18–1.60)

Using repellent

NS

1.69 (1.36–2.11)

NS

2.05 (1.65–2.55)

NS

NS

Tucking trousers in socks

1.36 (1.10–1.68)

2.47 (1.96–3.10)

NS

NS

NS

1.43 (1.14–1.78)

Avoiding high grass and bushes

NS

1.71 (1.45–2.00)

NS

1.25 (1.06–1.46)

NS

NS

Checking the body for ticks while outdoors

0.75 (0.63–0.89)

1.38 (1.17–1.63)

NS

2.51 (2.12–2.98)

NS

2.08 (1.74–2.49)

Checking the body for ticks after being outdoors

0.70 (0.60–0.82)

1.66 (1.42–1.93)

0.79 (0.67–0.94)

2.20 (1.87–2.59)

NS

5.29 (4.48–6.26)

  1. Odds ratios (95% confidence interval) are shown for variables that were statistically significantly associated (P < 0.01) with each of the protective practices. The variables were dichotomized, each compared with the opposite
  2. NS Not significant
  3. aThese univariable models were based on data from 2616 respondents, all others were based on data from all 2668 respondents