We are sorry, but NCBI web applications do not support your browser and may not function properly. More information

Results: 3

1.
Figure 1

Figure 1. From: The spatial distribution of known predictors of autism spectrum disorders impacts geographic variability in prevalence in central North Carolina.

Eight county central North Carolina study area. The residential addresses at birth for the birth cohort (blue points) and children with ASD or ID (red points) born in 1994, 1996, 1998 and 2000 are displayed with altered locations to preserve confidentiality.

Kate Hoffman, et al. Environ Health. 2012;11:80-80.
2.
Figure 2

Figure 2. From: The spatial distribution of known predictors of autism spectrum disorders impacts geographic variability in prevalence in central North Carolina.

Geographic distribution of ASD prevalence relative to the birth cohort n=11,034 and ASD n=532: Unadjusted (A) and fully adjusted models (B) are presented using the optimal span size of each (0.75 and 0.95 respectively). The unadjusted model is significantly different than flat (global P=0.003). Areas of significantly increased and decreased prevalence are indicated by black contour bands. Adjusted model is not significantly different than flat (global P=0.052). Adjustment factors were year of birth; plurality; maternal age, race, and level of education; and report of tobacco use during pregnancy.

Kate Hoffman, et al. Environ Health. 2012;11:80-80.
3.
Figure 3

Figure 3. From: The spatial distribution of known predictors of autism spectrum disorders impacts geographic variability in prevalence in central North Carolina.

Geographic distribution of ID prevalence relative to the birth cohort n=11,034 and ID n=916: Unadjusted (A) and fully adjusted models (B) are presented using the optimal span size of each (0.10 and 0.30 respectively). The unadjusted model is significantly different than flat (global P<0.001). Areas of significantly increased and decreased risk are indicated by black contour bands. Adjusted model is not significantly different than flat (global P=0.065). Adjustment factors were year of birth; plurality; maternal age, race, and level of education; and report of tobacco use during pregnancy.

Kate Hoffman, et al. Environ Health. 2012;11:80-80.

Supplemental Content

Recent activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...
Write to the Help Desk