Table 3 Logistic regression analysis of associations of groups, donor characteristics, and intervention status with re-donation among all participants
From: Effective methods for reactivating inactive blood donors: a stratified randomised controlled study
| Â | OR (95% CI) 1 vs. 2 vs. 3 | OR (95% CI) 1 vs. 2 | OR (95% CI) 1 vs 3 | OR (95% CI) 2 vs. 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Group | ||||
 Telephone call-1 | 0.92 (0.76, 1.11) | 1.10 (0.93, 1.31) | 0.80 (0.55, 1.00) | – |
 SMS-2 | 0.83 (0.66, 1.04) | reference | – | 1.17 (0.89, 1.55) |
 Control-3 | reference | – | reference | reference |
Gender | ||||
 Male | 1.14 (0.99, 1.31) | 1.13 (0.96, 1.33) | 1.10 (0.93, 1.30) | 1.20 (1.02, 1.41)* |
 Female | reference | reference | reference | reference |
Age | 1.03 (1.02, 1.04)** | 1.03 (1.02, 1.04)** | 1.03 (1.02, 1.04)** | 1.03 (1.02, 1.04)** |
Donation history | 1.08 (1.06, 1.10)** | 1.11 (1.08, 1.13)** | 1.07 (1.05, 1.09)** | 1.06 (1.04, 1.08)** |
Status of interventiona | ||||
 Successful | 1.56 (1.30, 1.88)** | 1.56 (1.29, 1.88)** | 2.01 (1.60, 2.55)** | 1.02 (0.77, 1.35) |
 Failed | reference | reference | reference | reference |