Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Hasil Analisa New - Astri Output1

    Uploaded by

    Astri Kartika Sari
    4 views114 pages
    Di Indonesia insiden BBLR bervariasi, dari hasil studi di 7 wilayah (Aceh, Palembang, Yogyakarta, Surabaya, Bali, Ujung Pandang, Manado), prevalensi BBLR berkisar antara 2,1 % - 17,7 % (Saraswati, Sumarno, 1998). Dari data SUSENAS 1999, angka insiden bayi lahir dengan Berat Badan Lahir Rendah (BBLR) adalah 14,0 %. Angka ini lebih besar dari target BBLR yang ditetapkan pada sasaran program perbaikan gizi menuju Indonesia sehat 2015 yakni maksimal 7 % (Setyowati, 2003).Di Indonesia insiden BBLR bervariasi, dari hasil studi di 7 wilayah (Aceh, Palembang, Yogyakarta, Surabaya, Bali, Ujung Pandang, Manado), prevalensi BBLR berkisar antara 2,1 % - 17,7 % (Saraswati, Sumarno, 1998). Dari data SUSENAS 1999, angka insiden bayi lahir dengan Berat Badan Lahir Rendah (BBLR) adalah 14,0 %. Angka ini lebih besar dari target BBLR yang ditetapkan pada sasaran program perbaikan gizi menuju Indonesia sehat 2015 yakni maksimal 7 % (Setyowati, 2003).Di Indonesia insiden BBLR bervariasi, dari hasil studi di 7 wilayah (Aceh, Palembang, Yogyakarta, Surabaya, Bali, Ujung Pandang, Manado), prevalensi BBLR berkisar antara 2,1 % - 17,7 % (Saraswati, Sumarno, 1998). Dari data SUSENAS 1999, angka insiden bayi lahir dengan Berat Badan Lahir Rendah (BBLR) adalah 14,0 %. Angka ini lebih besar dari target BBLR yang ditetapkan pada sasaran program perbaikan gizi menuju Indonesia sehat 2015 yakni maksimal 7 % (Setyowati, 2003).

    Original Title

    Hasil Analisa New - Astri Output1(1)

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Di Indonesia insiden BBLR bervariasi, dari hasil studi di 7 wilayah (Aceh, Palembang, Yogyakarta, Surabaya, Bali, Ujung Pandang, Manado), prevalensi BBLR berkisar antara 2,1 % - 17,7 % (Saraswati, Sumarno, 1998). Dari data SUSENAS 1999, angka insiden bayi lahir dengan Berat Badan Lahir Rendah (BBLR) adalah 14,0 %. Angka ini lebih besar dari target BBLR yang ditetapkan pada sasaran program perbaikan gizi menuju Indonesia sehat 2015 yakni maksimal 7 % (Setyowati, 2003).Di Indonesia insiden BBLR bervariasi, dari hasil studi di 7 wilayah (Aceh, Palembang, Yogyakarta, Surabaya, Bali, Ujung Pandang, Manado), prevalensi BBLR berkisar antara 2,1 % - 17,7 % (Saraswati, Sumarno, 1998). Dari data SUSENAS 1999, angka insiden bayi lahir dengan Berat Badan Lahir Rendah (BBLR) adalah 14,0 %. Angka ini lebih besar dari target BBLR yang ditetapkan pada sasaran program perbaikan gizi menuju Indonesia sehat 2015 yakni maksimal 7 % (Setyowati, 2003).Di Indonesia insiden BBLR bervariasi, dari hasil studi di 7 wilayah (Aceh, Palembang, Yogyakarta, Surabaya, Bali, Ujung Pandang, Manado), prevalensi BBLR berkisar antara 2,1 % - 17,7 % (Saraswati, Sumarno, 1998). Dari data SUSENAS 1999, angka insiden bayi lahir dengan Berat Badan Lahir Rendah (BBLR) adalah 14,0 %. Angka ini lebih besar dari target BBLR yang ditetapkan pada sasaran program perbaikan gizi menuju Indonesia sehat 2015 yakni maksimal 7 % (Setyowati, 2003).

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    4 views114 pages

    Hasil Analisa New - Astri Output1

    Uploaded by

    Astri Kartika Sari
    Di Indonesia insiden BBLR bervariasi, dari hasil studi di 7 wilayah (Aceh, Palembang, Yogyakarta, Surabaya, Bali, Ujung Pandang, Manado), prevalensi BBLR berkisar antara 2,1 % - 17,7 % (Saraswati, Sumarno, 1998). Dari data SUSENAS 1999, angka insiden bayi lahir dengan Berat Badan Lahir Rendah (BBLR) adalah 14,0 %. Angka ini lebih besar dari target BBLR yang ditetapkan pada sasaran program perbaikan gizi menuju Indonesia sehat 2015 yakni maksimal 7 % (Setyowati, 2003).Di Indonesia insiden BBLR bervariasi, dari hasil studi di 7 wilayah (Aceh, Palembang, Yogyakarta, Surabaya, Bali, Ujung Pandang, Manado), prevalensi BBLR berkisar antara 2,1 % - 17,7 % (Saraswati, Sumarno, 1998). Dari data SUSENAS 1999, angka insiden bayi lahir dengan Berat Badan Lahir Rendah (BBLR) adalah 14,0 %. Angka ini lebih besar dari target BBLR yang ditetapkan pada sasaran program perbaikan gizi menuju Indonesia sehat 2015 yakni maksimal 7 % (Setyowati, 2003).Di Indonesia insiden BBLR bervariasi, dari hasil studi di 7 wilayah (Aceh, Palembang, Yogyakarta, Surabaya, Bali, Ujung Pandang, Manado), prevalensi BBLR berkisar antara 2,1 % - 17,7 % (Saraswati, Sumarno, 1998). Dari data SUSENAS 1999, angka insiden bayi lahir dengan Berat Badan Lahir Rendah (BBLR) adalah 14,0 %. Angka ini lebih besar dari target BBLR yang ditetapkan pada sasaran program perbaikan gizi menuju Indonesia sehat 2015 yakni maksimal 7 % (Setyowati, 2003).

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 114

    Frequencies

    Statistics

    UMUR

    N
    Valid
    213

    Missing
    3
    Mean

    25.73
    Std. Deviation
    5.908

    Page 1

    UMUR

    Frequency
    Percent
    Valid Percent
    Cumulative

    Percent

    Valid
    14
    1
    .5
    .5
    .5

    16
    2
    .9
    .9
    1.4

    17
    5
    2.3
    2.3
    3.8

    18
    5
    2.3
    2.3
    6.1

    19
    15
    6.9
    7.0
    13.1

    20
    23
    10.6
    10.8
    23.9

    21
    12
    5.6
    5.6
    29.6

    22
    11
    5.1
    5.2
    34.7

    23
    18
    8.3
    8.5
    43.2

    24
    8
    3.7
    3.8
    46.9

    25
    14
    6.5
    6.6
    53.5

    26
    11
    5.1
    5.2
    58.7

    27
    11
    5.1
    5.2
    63.8

    28
    18
    8.3
    8.5
    72.3

    29
    2
    .9
    .9
    73.2

    30
    12
    5.6
    5.6
    78.9

    31
    4
    1.9
    1.9
    80.8

    32
    10
    4.6
    4.7
    85.4

    33
    6
    2.8
    2.8
    88.3

    34
    5
    2.3
    2.3
    90.6

    35
    7
    3.2
    3.3
    93.9

    36
    4
    1.9
    1.9
    95.8

    37
    4
    1.9
    1.9
    97.7

    41
    1
    .5
    .5
    98.1

    42
    3
    1.4
    1.4
    99.5

    43
    1
    .5
    .5
    100.0

    Total
    213
    98.6
    100.0

    Missing
    System
    3
    1.4

    Total

    216
    100.0

    Frequencies

    Statistics

    L_USIA

    Valid

    Missing 0

    Page 2

    216

    L_USIA

    Frequency
    Percent
    Valid Percent
    Cumulative

    Percent

    Valid
    0
    159
    73.6
    73.6
    73.6

    1
    57
    26.4
    26.4
    100.0

    Total
    216
    100.0
    100.0

    Frequencies

    Statistics

    GRAVIDA

    N
    Valid
    215

    Missing

    GRAVIDA

    Frequency
    Percent
    Valid Percent
    Cumulative

    Percent

    Valid
    1
    96
    44.4
    44.7

    44.7

    2
    77
    35.6
    35.8
    80.5

    3
    28
    13.0
    13.0
    93.5

    4
    11
    5.1
    5.1
    98.6

    5
    2
    .9
    .9
    99.5

    6
    1
    .5
    .5
    100.0

    Total
    215
    99.5
    100.0

    Missing
    System
    1
    .5

    Total

    216
    100.0

    Frequencies

    Statistics

    L_GRAVIDA

    Valid

    Missing 0

    L_GRAVIDA

    Frequency
    Percent
    Valid Percent
    Cumulative

    216

    Percent

    Valid
    0
    97
    44.9
    44.9
    44.9

    1
    119
    55.1
    55.1
    100.0

    Total
    216
    100.0
    100.0

    Frequencies

    Page 3

    Statistics

    PARTUS

    N
    Valid
    210

    Missing
    6

    PARTUS

    Frequency
    Percent
    Valid Percent
    Cumulative

    Percent

    Valid
    0
    100
    46.3
    47.6
    47.6

    1
    75
    34.7
    35.7
    83.3

    2
    28
    13.0
    13.3
    96.7

    3
    5
    2.3
    2.4
    99.0

    4
    2
    .9
    1.0
    100.0

    Total
    210
    97.2
    100.0

    Missing
    System
    6
    2.8

    Total

    216
    100.0

    Frequencies

    Statistics

    L_PARTUS

    Valid

    Missing 0

    L_PARTUS

    216

    Frequency
    Percent
    Valid Percent
    Cumulative

    Percent

    Valid
    0
    181
    83.8
    83.8
    83.8

    1
    35
    16.2
    16.2
    100.0

    Total

    216
    100.0
    100.0

    Frequencies

    Statistics

    ABORTUS

    N
    Valid
    211

    Missing
    5

    Page 4

    ABORTUS

    Frequency
    Percent
    Valid Percent
    Cumulative

    Percent

    Valid
    0
    201
    93.1
    95.3
    95.3

    1
    6
    2.8
    2.8
    98.1

    2
    3
    1.4
    1.4
    99.5

    3
    1
    .5
    .5
    100.0

    Total
    211
    97.7
    100.0

    Missing
    System
    5
    2.3

    Total

    216
    100.0

    Frequencies

    Statistics

    L_ABORTUS

    Valid

    Missing 0

    216

    L_ABORTUS

    Frequency
    Percent
    Valid Percent
    Cumulative

    Percent

    Valid
    206
    95.4
    95.4
    95.4

    1
    10
    4.6
    4.6
    100.0

    Total
    216
    100.0
    100.0

    Frequencies

    Statistics

    UMUR KEHAMILAN

    N
    Valid
    215

    Missing
    1

    Page 5

    UMUR KEHAMILAN

    Frequency
    Percent
    Valid Percent
    Cumulative

    Percent

    Valid
    26
    1
    .5
    .5
    .5

    27
    2
    .9
    .9
    1.4

    28
    2
    .9
    .9
    2.3

    32
    1
    .5
    .5
    2.8

    33
    1
    .5
    .5
    3.3

    34

    2
    .9
    .9
    4.2

    35
    2
    .9
    .9
    5.1

    36
    1
    .5
    .5
    5.6

    37
    28
    13.0
    13.0
    18.6

    38
    45

    20.8
    20.9
    39.5

    39
    52
    24.1
    24.2
    63.7

    40
    53
    24.5
    24.7
    88.4

    41
    17
    7.9
    7.9
    96.3

    42
    6
    2.8

    2.8
    99.1

    43
    2
    .9
    .9
    100.0

    Total
    215
    99.5
    100.0

    Missing
    System
    1
    .5

    Total

    216
    100.0

    Frequencies

    Statistics

    L_UMUR HAMIL

    Valid

    Missing 0

    L_UMUR HAMIL

    Frequency
    Percent
    Valid Percent
    Cumulative

    216

    Percent

    Valid
    0
    204
    94.4
    94.4
    94.4

    1
    12
    5.6
    5.6
    100.0

    Total
    216
    100.0
    100.0

    Frequencies

    Page 6

    Statistics

    LLA

    N
    Valid
    216

    Missing
    0

    LLA

    Frequency
    Percent
    Valid Percent
    Cumulative

    Percent

    Valid
    19.
    2
    .9
    .9
    .9

    20.
    2
    .9
    .9
    1.9

    21.
    9
    4.2
    4.2
    6.0

    22.
    13
    6.0
    6.0
    12.0

    23.
    3
    1.4
    1.4
    13.4

    24.
    37
    17.1
    17.1
    30.6

    245.
    1
    .5
    .5
    31.0

    25.
    25
    11.6
    11.6
    42.6

    26.
    20
    9.3
    9.3
    51.9

    27.
    19
    8.8
    8.8
    60.6

    28.
    24
    11.1
    11.1
    71.8

    29,2
    1
    .5
    .5
    72.2

    29.
    15
    6.9
    6.9
    79.2

    30.
    26
    12.0
    12.0
    91.2

    31.
    10
    4.6
    4.6
    95.8

    32,5
    1
    .5
    .5
    96.3

    32.
    4
    1.9
    1.9
    98.1

    33.
    1
    .5
    .5
    98.6

    34.
    1
    .5
    .5
    99.1

    36.
    2
    .9
    .9
    100.0

    Total
    216
    100.0
    100.0

    Frequencies

    Statistics

    L_LLA

    N
    Valid
    216

    Missing

    Page 7

    L_LLA

    Frequency
    Percent
    Valid Percent
    Cumulative

    Percent

    Valid
    0
    187
    86.6
    86.6
    86.6

    1
    29
    13.4
    13.4
    100.0

    Total
    216
    100.0
    100.0

    Frequencies

    Statistics

    BB LAHIR

    N
    Valid
    216

    Missing

    Page 8

    BB LAHIR

    Frequency
    Percent
    Valid Percent
    Cumulative

    Percent

    Valid
    1000
    1
    .5
    .5
    .5

    1200
    2
    .9
    .9
    1.4

    1400
    2
    .9
    .9
    2.3

    1700
    1
    .5
    .5
    2.8

    1800
    1
    .5
    .5
    3.2

    2000
    3
    1.4
    1.4
    4.6

    2100
    2
    .9
    .9
    5.6

    2300
    1
    .5
    .5
    6.0

    2400
    4
    1.9
    1.9
    7.9

    2500
    13
    6.0
    6.0
    13.9

    2600
    6
    2.8
    2.8
    16.7

    2700
    6
    2.8
    2.8
    19.4

    2750
    1
    .5
    .5
    19.9

    2800
    28
    13.0
    13.0
    32.9

    2900
    12
    5.6
    5.6
    38.4

    3000
    30
    13.9
    13.9
    52.3

    3100
    17
    7.9
    7.9
    60.2

    3150
    1
    .5
    .5
    60.6

    3200
    15
    6.9
    6.9
    67.6

    3300
    13
    6.0
    6.0
    73.6

    3400
    10
    4.6
    4.6
    78.2

    3450
    1
    .5
    .5
    78.7

    3500
    18
    8.3
    8.3
    87.0

    3600
    9
    4.2
    4.2
    91.2

    3700
    4
    1.9
    1.9
    93.1

    3800
    3
    1.4
    1.4
    94.4

    3900
    3
    1.4
    1.4
    95.8

    4000
    3
    1.4
    1.4
    97.2

    4100
    2
    .9
    .9
    98.1

    4200
    3
    1.4
    1.4
    99.5

    4900
    1
    .5
    .5
    100.0

    Total
    216
    100.0
    100.0

    Frequencies

    Page 9

    Statistics

    L_BB LAHIR

    N
    Valid
    216

    Missing
    0

    L_BB LAHIR

    Frequency
    Percent
    Valid Percent
    Cumulative

    Percent

    Valid
    0
    190
    88.0
    88.0
    88.0

    1
    26
    12.0
    12.0
    100.0

    Total
    216
    100.0
    100.0

    Crosstabs

    Case Processing Summary

    Cases

    Valid

    Missing Total

    Percent N

    L_USIA * L_BB LAHIR

    Percent N

    216

    100.0% 0

    L_USIA * L_BB LAHIR Crosstabulation

    Count

    L_BB LAHIR

    Total

    L_USIA 0

    139

    20

    51

    57

    Total

    190

    26

    216

    Percent

    159

    .0%

    216

    100.0%

    Chi-Square Tests

    Value
    df
    Asymp. Sig.
    Exact Sig. (2Exact Sig. (1-

    (2-sided)
    sided)
    sided)

    Pearson Chi-Square
    .167

    1
    .683

    Continuity Correction

    .029
    1
    .864

    Likelihood Ratio
    .171
    1
    .679

    Fisher's Exact Test

    .815
    .443

    Linear-by-Linear
    .166
    1
    .684

    Association

    N of Valid Cases
    216

    0 cells (.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 6.86.
    Computed only for a 2x2 table

    Page 10

    Risk Estimate

    95% Confidence Interval

    Value
    Lower
    Upper
    Odds Ratio for L_USIA (0
    .818
    .311
    2.151
    / 1)

    For cohort L_BB LAHIR =


    .977
    .878
    1.087
    0

    For cohort L_BB LAHIR =


    1.195
    .505
    2.826
    1

    N of Valid Cases
    216

    Crosstabs

    Case Processing Summary

    Cases

    Valid

    Missing Total

    Percent N

    L_GRAVIDA * L_BB

    Percent N

    216

    Percent

    100.0% 0

    LAHIR

    L_GRAVIDA * L_BB LAHIR Crosstabulation

    .0%

    216

    100.0%

    Count

    L_BB LAHIR

    Total

    L_GRAVIDA 0

    83

    14

    107

    12

    119

    Total

    190

    26

    216

    Chi-Square Tests

    Value
    df
    Asymp. Sig.
    Exact Sig. (2Exact Sig. (1-

    97

    (2-sided)
    sided)
    sided)

    Pearson Chi-Square
    .955

    1
    .329

    Continuity Correction
    .588
    1
    .443

    Likelihood Ratio
    .949
    1
    .330

    Fisher's Exact Test

    .402
    .221

    Linear-by-Linear
    .950
    1
    .330

    Association

    N of Valid Cases
    216

    0 cells (.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 11.68.
    Computed only for a 2x2 table

    Page 11

    Risk Estimate

    95% Confidence Interval

    Value
    Lower
    Upper

    Odds Ratio for


    .665
    .292

    1.514

    L_GRAVIDA (0 / 1)

    For cohort L_BB LAHIR =


    .952
    .860

    1.053

    For cohort L_BB LAHIR =


    1.431
    .695

    2.949

    N of Valid Cases
    216

    Crosstabs

    Case Processing Summary

    Cases

    Valid

    Missing

    Total

    N
    Percent
    N
    Percent
    N
    Percent

    L_PARTUS * L_BB LAHIR


    216
    100.0%

    0
    .0%
    216
    100.0%

    L_PARTUS * L_BB LAHIR Crosstabulation

    Count

    L_BB LAHIR

    0
    1
    Total

    L_PARTUS 0
    156
    25
    181

    1
    34
    1
    35

    Total
    190
    26
    216

    Chi-Square Tests

    Value
    df
    Asymp. Sig.
    Exact Sig. (2Exact Sig. (1-

    (2-sided)

    sided)
    sided)

    Pearson Chi-Square

    3.324

    .068

    Continuity Correction
    2.370
    1

    .124

    Likelihood Ratio
    4.391
    1

    .036

    Fisher's Exact Test

    .088
    .050

    Linear-by-Linear
    3.309
    1

    .069

    Association

    N of Valid Cases

    216

    1 cells (25.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 4.21.
    Computed only for a 2x2 table

    Page 12

    Risk Estimate

    95% Confidence Interval

    Value
    Lower
    Upper
    Odds Ratio for
    .184
    .024
    1.401
    L_PARTUS (0 / 1)

    For cohort L_BB LAHIR =


    .887
    .818
    .962
    0

    For cohort L_BB LAHIR =


    4.834
    .677
    34.518
    1

    N of Valid Cases
    216

    Crosstabs

    Case Processing Summary

    Cases

    Valid

    Missing Total

    Percent N

    L_ABORTUS * L_BB

    Percent N

    216

    Percent

    100.0% 0

    LAHIR

    L_ABORTUS * L_BB LAHIR Crosstabulation

    .0%

    216

    100.0%

    Count

    L_BB LAHIR

    Total

    L_ABORTUS 0 181

    25

    10

    Total

    190

    26

    216

    Chi-Square Tests

    Value
    df
    Asymp. Sig.
    Exact Sig. (2Exact Sig. (1-

    206

    (2-sided)
    sided)
    sided)

    Pearson Chi-Square
    .041

    1
    .839

    Continuity Correction
    .000
    1
    1.000

    Likelihood Ratio
    .043
    1
    .835

    Fisher's Exact Test

    1.000
    .656

    Linear-by-Linear
    .041
    1
    .840

    Association

    N of Valid Cases
    216

    1 cells (25.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 1.20.
    Computed only for a 2x2 table

    Page 13

    Risk Estimate

    95% Confidence Interval

    Value
    Lower
    Upper
    Odds Ratio for
    .804
    .098
    6.621
    L_ABORTUS (0 / 1)

    For cohort L_BB LAHIR =


    .976
    .789
    1.208
    0

    For cohort L_BB LAHIR =


    1.214
    .182
    8.076
    1

    N of Valid Cases
    216

    Crosstabs

    Case Processing Summary

    Cases

    Valid

    Missing Total

    Percent N

    L_UMUR HAMIL * L_BB

    Percent N

    216

    Percent

    100.0% 0

    LAHIR

    L_UMUR HAMIL * L_BB LAHIR Crosstabulation

    .0%

    216

    100.0%

    Count

    L_BB LAHIR

    Total

    L_UMUR HAMIL 0

    187

    12

    Total

    190

    26

    216

    Chi-Square Tests

    Value
    df
    Asymp. Sig.
    Exact Sig. (2Exact Sig. (1-

    17

    204

    (2-sided)
    sided)
    sided)

    Pearson Chi-Square
    47.572

    1
    .000

    Continuity Correction
    41.484
    1
    .000

    Likelihood Ratio
    28.305
    1
    .000

    Fisher's Exact Test

    .000
    .000

    Linear-by-Linear
    47.352
    1
    .000

    Association

    N of Valid Cases
    216

    1 cells (25.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 1.44.
    Computed only for a 2x2 table

    Page 14

    Risk Estimate

    95% Confidence Interval

    Value
    Lower
    Upper
    Odds Ratio for L_UMUR
    33.000
    8.156
    133.527
    HAMIL (0 / 1)

    For cohort L_BB LAHIR =


    3.667
    1.375
    9.778
    0

    For cohort L_BB LAHIR =


    .111
    .063
    .195
    1

    N of Valid Cases
    216

    CROSSTABS

    /TABLES=L_LLA BY L_BBLAHIR /FORMAT=AVALUE TABLES


    /STATISTICS=CHISQ RISK /CELLS=COUNT

    /COUNT ROUND CELL.

    Crosstabs

    Case Processing Summary

    Cases

    Valid

    Missing Total

    Percent N

    L_LLA * L_BB LAHIR

    Percent N

    216

    100.0% 0

    L_LLA * L_BB LAHIR Crosstabulation

    Count

    L_BB LAHIR

    Total

    L_LLA 0

    174

    13

    16

    13

    29

    Total

    190

    26

    216

    Percent

    187

    .0%

    216

    100.0%

    Page 15

    Chi-Square Tests

    Value
    df
    Asymp. Sig.
    Exact Sig. (2Exact Sig. (1-

    (2-sided)
    sided)
    sided)

    Pearson Chi-Square
    34.016
    1
    .000

    Continuity Correction
    30.533
    1
    .000

    Likelihood Ratio
    24.544
    1
    .000

    Fisher's Exact Test

    .000
    .000

    Linear-by-Linear
    33.859
    1
    .000

    Association

    N of Valid Cases
    216

    1 cells (25.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 3.49.
    Computed only for a 2x2 table

    Risk Estimate

    95% Confidence Interval

    Value
    Lower
    Upper
    Odds Ratio for L_LLA (0 /
    10.875
    4.318
    27.389
    1)

    For cohort L_BB LAHIR =


    1.686
    1.212
    2.347
    0

    For cohort L_BB LAHIR =


    .155
    .080
    .301
    1

    N of Valid Cases

    216

    Page 16

    You might also like