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.