When we derived models adjusting for all independently associated potential mediators or confounders, there remained a 98% increased odds of low/mid-frequency hearing impairment and a 50% increased odds of high-frequency hearing impairment associated with diabetes that was left unexplained.
In fully adjusted models, diabetes remained significantly associated with a 98% increased odds of low/mid-frequency hearing impairment (1.98 [1.26–3.10]) and a 50% increased odds (1.50 [1.01–2.23]) of high-frequency hearing impairment after controlling for age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, smoking, occupational noise exposure, and CRP (Table 3).
Diabetes was associated with a 100% increased odds of low/mid-frequency hearing impairment (odds ratio 2.03 [95% CI 1.32 3.10]) and a 67% increased odds of high-frequency hearing impairment (1.67 [1.14–2.44]) in preliminary models after controlling for age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, smoking, and occupational noise exposure.
In our preliminary model, diabetes was associated with twice the odds of low/mid-frequency hearing impairment (odds ratio 2.03 [95% CI 1.32 3.10]) and a 67% increased odds of high-frequency hearing impairment (1.67 [1.14–2.44]) while adjusting for age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, smoking, and occupational noise exposure.
Subjects who reported coronary heart disease or peripheral neuropathy had over four times the odds of high-frequency hearing impairment.
Adjusting for sociodemographic factors, we found that low HDL levels increased the odds of low/mid-frequency hearing impairment by 2.2-fold (Table 3).
The higher odds of high-frequency hearing impairment among male subjects than female subjects is possibly attributed to residual confounding by industrial and/or recreational noise exposure, for which self-reported measures often are inadequate.
We also considered using the log-odds of the frequency of the most frequent amino acid and the relative entropy between the amino acid distribution of position x within subtree S and a background distribution (Wang and Samudrala, 2006).
Our results supports the IMB model: providing patients' required information has a decisive influence on performing home exercises to recommended frequency per week (Table 3, item "Clarifying doubts and questions from patient" increases odds of adherence to frequency multivariate OR (95% CI) = 4.1 (1.4-12 1.4-12
For example, the odds of reporting high-frequency fruit consumption rather than medium- or low-frequency consumption are 3.13 times (95% CI 1.78 5.51) greater for women vs. men (all other variables being held constant).
