Skip to main content

Table 3 Association between agreement score and practice location

From: An appraisal: how notifiable infectious diseases are reported by Hungarian family physicians

 

Statements

City

Smal town

Village

  

Coef.

p

Coef.

p

Coef.

p

1.

The Hungarian infection surveillance system works well.

0,42

0,311

0,53

0,167

0,31

0,938

2.

Severe infectious diseases are detected in special care.

0,39

0,384

0,41

0,332

−0,91

0,841

3.

I only report lab proven infection cases.

−0,72

0,271

−0,34

0,577

−1,54

0,021

4.

Infection cases exclusively reported by one single doctor do not contribute to epidemiology surveillance.

0,16

0,791

0,66

0,269

0,41

0,522

5.

Reporting infections cases hinders my daily clinical work.

−0,28

0,632

−0,32

0,559

−1,23

0,042

6.

Reporting infection cases is not only an obligation by law but is also a professional task as well.

0,57

0,071

0,34

0,256

0,87

0,007

7.

Only relevant and severe infection cases should be reported.

−0,23

0,709

−0,18

0,756

−1,08

0,084

8.

Reporting infections requires more time that we are sometimes short of.

−0,91

0,137

−0,68

0,238

−1,32

0,033

9.

I do not know how healthcare authorities will use the information I provide.

−0,93

0,103

−0,24

0,654

0,13

0,808

10.

I cannot report occasionally due to the failure of the informatics system (system unavailable).

−0,08

0,903

−1,13

0,079

−0,03

0,961

  1. The strength of association was assessed using General Linear Regression model and expressed in the table by the regression coefficient (Coef.). It is the estimated change in agreement score caused by one unit increase in that particular variable. One unit increase for variable location of practice is the change from capital to ‘City’, or ‘Small town’, or ‘Village’. The probability that the coefficient not different from zero is given under ‘p’. Statistical significant coefficients at 5% level are in bold