3.9 Article

Modeling the potential risk factors of bovine viral diarrhea prevalence in Egypt using univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses

期刊

VETERINARY WORLD
卷 11, 期 3, 页码 259-267

出版社

VETERINARY WORLD
DOI: 10.14202/vetworld.2018.259-267

关键词

bovine viral diarrhea; likelihood ratio test; logistic regression; odds ratio; seroprevalence

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aim: The present cross-sectional study was conducted to determine the seroprevalence and potential risk factors associated with Bovine viral diarrhea virus (BVDV) disease in cattle and buffaloes in Egypt, to model the potential risk factors associated with the disease using logistic regression (LR) models, and to fit the best predictive model for the current data. Materials and Methods: A total of 740 blood samples were collected within November 2012-March 2013 from animals aged between 6 months and 3 years. The potential risk factors studied were species, age, sex, and herd location. All serum samples were examined with indirect ELIZA test for antibody detection. Data were analyzed with different statistical approaches such as Chi-square test, odds ratios (OR), univariable, and multivariable LR models. Results: Results revealed a non-significant association between being seropositive with BVDV and all risk factors, except for species of animal. Seroprevalence percentages were 40% and 23% for cattle and buffaloes, respectively. OR for all categories were close to one with the highest OR for cattle relative to buffaloes, which was 2.237. Likelihood ratio tests showed a significant drop of the -2LL from univariable LR to multivariable LR models. Conclusion: There was an evidence of high seroprevalence of BVDV among cattle as compared with buffaloes with the possibility of infection in different age groups of animals In addition, multivariable LR model was proved to provide more information for association and prediction purposes relative to univariable LR models and Chi-square tests if we have more than one predictor.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.9
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据