Table-3: Binary Logistic Regression Analysis in terms of Labor
Protraction, Labor Arrest, Ceserean Delivery and Shoulder Dystocia
between Nulliparous and Parous Groups
Risk Factors:
Labor Protraction
Nulliparous Group
Nulliparous Group
Nulliparous Group
Nulliparous Group
Parous Group
Parous Group
Parous Group
Parous Group
Wald
O.R.
%95 C.I.
p
Wald
O.R.
%95 C.I.
p
Anterior Abdominal Wall Adipose Thickness
19,987
3,345
1,970-5,680
<0,001
28,677
8,897
3,998-19,801
<0,001
Femur Adipose Thickness
3,939
1,777
1,007-3,136
0,047
11,717
3,349
1,676-6,691
0,001
Humerus Adipose Thickness
10,250
2,978
1,527-5,808
0,001
1,933
1,519
0,843-2,739
0,164
Total Adipose Tissue Thickness
43,413
2,490
1,898-3,266
<0,001
41,035
2,933
2,110-4,076
<0,001
OR: odds ratio; CI: confidence interval; Wald: test statistic value.
Since the dependent variable consists of 2 groups, binary logistic
regression used. Enter method used in analysis. Hosmer and Lemeshow test
p values: 0.859, 0.880 (for nulliparous group and parous group,
respectively) and the models had good data compatibility.
OR: odds ratio; CI: confidence interval; Wald: test statistic value.
Since the dependent variable consists of 2 groups, binary logistic
regression used. Enter method used in analysis. Hosmer and Lemeshow test
p values: 0.859, 0.880 (for nulliparous group and parous group,
respectively) and the models had good data compatibility.
OR: odds ratio; CI: confidence interval; Wald: test statistic value.
Since the dependent variable consists of 2 groups, binary logistic
regression used. Enter method used in analysis. Hosmer and Lemeshow test
p values: 0.859, 0.880 (for nulliparous group and parous group,
respectively) and the models had good data compatibility.
OR: odds ratio; CI: confidence interval; Wald: test statistic value.
Since the dependent variable consists of 2 groups, binary logistic
regression used. Enter method used in analysis. Hosmer and Lemeshow test
p values: 0.859, 0.880 (for nulliparous group and parous group,
respectively) and the models had good data compatibility.
OR: odds ratio; CI: confidence interval; Wald: test statistic value.
Since the dependent variable consists of 2 groups, binary logistic
regression used. Enter method used in analysis. Hosmer and Lemeshow test
p values: 0.859, 0.880 (for nulliparous group and parous group,
respectively) and the models had good data compatibility.
OR: odds ratio; CI: confidence interval; Wald: test statistic value.
Since the dependent variable consists of 2 groups, binary logistic
regression used. Enter method used in analysis. Hosmer and Lemeshow test
p values: 0.859, 0.880 (for nulliparous group and parous group,
respectively) and the models had good data compatibility.
OR: odds ratio; CI: confidence interval; Wald: test statistic value.
Since the dependent variable consists of 2 groups, binary logistic
regression used. Enter method used in analysis. Hosmer and Lemeshow test
p values: 0.859, 0.880 (for nulliparous group and parous group,
respectively) and the models had good data compatibility.
OR: odds ratio; CI: confidence interval; Wald: test statistic value.
Since the dependent variable consists of 2 groups, binary logistic
regression used. Enter method used in analysis. Hosmer and Lemeshow test
p values: 0.859, 0.880 (for nulliparous group and parous group,
respectively) and the models had good data compatibility.
OR: odds ratio; CI: confidence interval; Wald: test statistic value.
Since the dependent variable consists of 2 groups, binary logistic
regression used. Enter method used in analysis. Hosmer and Lemeshow test
p values: 0.859, 0.880 (for nulliparous group and parous group,
respectively) and the models had good data compatibility.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|