Skip to main content

Table 6 Logistic regression analyses of genotype distribution between ADHD and controls a

From: BAIAP2 exhibits association to childhood ADHD especially predominantly inattentive subtype in Chinese Han subjects

  B S.E. Wald P OR (95% CI)
ADHD vs. Control (569 vs. 957)
Age −0.014 0.001 149.647 < 0.001 0.99 (0.98-0.99)
Gender −1.410 0.141 100.549 < 0.001 0.24 (0.19-0.32)
rs3934492 (11 + 12 vs. 22) 0.354 0.153 5.365 0.021 1.43 (1.06-1.92)
Age −0.014 0.001 151.851 < 0.001 0.99 (0.98-0.99)
Gender −1.429 0.142 100.615 < 0.001 0.24 (0.18-0.32)
rs4969385 (11 + 12 vs. 22) 0.850 0.377 5.092 0.024 2.33 (1.02-5.00)
ADHD- I vs. Control (295 vs. 957)
Age −0.011 0.001 76.853 < 0.001 0.99 (0.99-0.99)
Gender −1.265 0.176 51.643 < 0.001 0.28 (0.20-0.40)
rs4969239 (11 vs. 12 + 22) 0.327 0.150 4.743 0.029 1.39 (1.03-1.86)
Age −0.011 0.001 76.411 < 0.001 0.99 (0.99-0.99)
Gender −1.259 0.176 51.106 < 0.001 0.28 (0.20-0.40)
rs4969239 (11 + 12 vs. 22) 0.513 0.208 6.090 0.014 1.67 (1.11-2.51)
Age −0.011 0.001 76.882 < 0.001 0.99 (0.99-0.99)
Gender −1.285 0.172 55.511 < 0.001 0.28 (0.20-0.39)
rs3934492 (11 + 12 vs. 22) 0.368 0.186 3.915 0.048 1.45 (1.00-2.08)
Age −0.011 0.001 77.292 < 0.001 0.99 (0.99-0.99)
Gender −1.297 0.173 54.534 < 0.001 0.27 (0.19-0.39)
rs4969385 (11 + 12 vs. 22) 1.023 0.412 6.174 0.013 2.78 (1.24-6.24)
ADHD- C vs. Control (252 vs. 957)
Age −0.015 0.002 84.927 < 0.001 0.99 (0.98-0.99)
Gender −1.500 0.196 58.497 < 0.001 0.22 (0.15-0.33)
rs4969385 (11 + 12 vs. 22) 0.820 0.478 2.938 0.086 2.27 (0.89-5.80)
  1. aNominal P values < 0.05 are indicated in bold.