PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 16725439

Multiple linear and nonlinear regression analyses of factors causing calving difficulty.

Abstract

Calving difficulty (CD) was analyzed as the dependent variable from observations on 592 first-calf, 2-year-old heifers that were either Angus X Hereford (AH), Charolais X AH or Simmental X AH. Independent variables were birth weight (BW), pelvic area (PA), BW.(33), PA.(5), cow weight (CW), cow condition score (CS) and sex of calf (S). CD was analyzed as score (1 = no difficulty through 4 = extreme difficulty) CD-I, % CD (1 vs 2 + 3 + 4 , CD-II) or % high CD (1 + 2 vs 3 + 4 , CD-III). R(2) values from CD-II and CD-III multiple correlation (R) analyses were consistently lower (.10 to .13) than from the CD-I analysis. When only BW and PA were included in the model, R(2) values for CD-I were .36, .39 and .39 for the linear, quadratic and cubic analyses, respectively. When BW, PA, CW, CS and S were included in the model, the R(2) values for CD-I were .40 and .42 for the linear and quadratic analyses (cubic effects were not tested). In the linear analysis with BW.(33) and PA.(5), the R(2) for CD-I was .36. In all analyses, the order of importance of the factors studied was BW and PA, with a much lower contribution from CW and S. CS did not account for a significant increase in R(2) in any analysis. CD remained below 50% whenever the PA BW ratio exceeded 8.4. This ratio is a convenient practical method to relate PA and BW to CD. Conclusions are that the linear effects of BW and PA account for the majority of the identified variation in CD (R(2)) and that small increases in R(2) can be obtained by adding CW, CS and S to the model and/or by expanding the model to include quadratic effects.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

R E Short, R A Bellows, R B Staigmiller, J B Carr. 1979. Multiple linear and nonlinear regression analyses of factors causing calving difficulty.. https://doi.org/10.1016/0093-691x(79)90078-5

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Effectiveness of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccines against hospitalisation according to frailty risk: a prespecified analysis of the randomised trial DANFLU-2.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a major risk factor for influenza-related complications and can influence vaccine effectiveness. We aimed to assess the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of high-dose (HD-IIV) versus standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (SD-IIV) in older adults aged 65 years or older according to frailty risk. METHODS: This study was a prespecified analysis of DANFLU-2, an open-label, individually randomised trial, conducted in Denmark during three consecutive influenza seasons (2022-23, 2023-24, and 2024-25). Adults aged 65 years or older were randomised (1:1) to the HD-IIV or SD-IIV group. The primary endpoint was hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia. Frailty was defined according to the validated Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) based on ICD-10 codes within 10 years before randomisation. Participants were stratified into three HFRS categories, namely low (<5 points), intermediate (5-15 points), and high (>15 points) frailty risk. The rVE of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint was assessed across prespecified HFRS categories and treating HFRS as a continuous variable. Pearson's chi-square test was used to compare safety events across frailty risk groups and randomisation groups. FINDINGS: Among 332&#x2009;438 randomised participants (mean age 73&#xb7;7 years [SD 5&#xb7;8]; 161&#x2009;538 [48&#xb7;6%] were female), 276&#x2009;173 (83&#xb7;1%) had low frailty risk, 52&#x2009;395 (15&#xb7;8%) had intermediate frailty risk, and 3861 (1&#xb7;2%) had high frailty risk. The primary endpoint of hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia occurred in 1424 (0&#xb7;5%) of 276&#x2009;173 participants with low frailty risk, 761 (1&#xb7;5%) of 52&#x2009;395 with intermediate frailty risk, and 163 (4&#xb7;2%) of 3861 with high frailty risk (relative risk [RR] for intermediate vs low frailty risk 2&#xb7;8 [95% CI 2&#xb7;6-3&#xb7;1]; RR for high vs low frailty risk 8&#xb7;2 [7&#xb7;0-9&#xb7;6]). HFRS as a continuous variable significantly modified the effect of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint with higher rVE estimates with increasing HFRS (pinteraction=0&#xb7;020). The rVE was 0&#xb7;2% (95% CI -10&#xb7;8 to 10&#xb7;2) among those with low frailty risk, 13&#xb7;1% (-0&#xb7;4 to 24&#xb7;8) among those with intermediate frailty risk, and 19&#xb7;9% (-10&#xb7;3 to 42&#xb7;1) among those with high frailty risk. No significant interaction was observed when HFRS was assessed according to the prespecified categorical frailty groups (pinteraction=0&#xb7;17). The proportion of participants with at least one serious adverse event increased across frailty risk groups (13&#x2009;366 [4&#xb7;8%] of 275&#x2009;795 for low frailty risk, 5475 [10&#xb7;5%] of 52&#x2009;315 for intermediate frailty risk, and 777 [20&#xb7;2%] of 3850 for high frailty risk; p<0&#xb7;0001), with similar proportions of serious adverse events in the HD-IIV and SD-IIV groups for each frailty risk group. INTERPRETATION: Among adults aged 65 years or older in Denmark, frailty risk might modify the effects of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia, with higher rVE estimates with increasing frailty risk. These findings might support considering high-dose influenza vaccines for frail older adults. However, effect modification was not evident when frailty was assessed using prespecified categorical subgroups, and subgroup-specific estimates were imprecise, with 95% CIs crossing the null. These results should be considered exploratory, warranting further investigation. FUNDING: The DANFLU-2 trial was funded by Sanofi.

Journal Article↗