Mean (±SE) number of husband’s other partners (n = 173, controlling for age and age at marriage with a town proximity-by-Spanish fluency interaction term).

<p>Mean (±SE) number of husband’s other partners (n = 173, controlling for age and age at marriage with a town proximity-by-Spanish fluency interaction term).</p

Odds ratios (ORs) from GEE analyses of effects of sexual risk-taking, town proximity, and wife’s Spanish fluency and literacy on likelihood of GM.

<p>Models are weighted to adjust for sample bias (see text). OR’s are adjusted for age. Refer to <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0050384#pone.0050384.s007" target="_blank">table S1</a> for ORs from unweighted models.</p>***<p>p≤0.001;</p>**<p>p≤0.01;</p>*<p>p≤0.05; t p≤0.10.</p>a<p>Each parameter was evaluated independently (Ind), controlling for age and age² if applicable. Starting from a full model, parameters were removed in a stepwise fashion until all parameters were significant at p≤0.10 (STEP).</p>b<p>Wife’s report; due to skewed distribution and potential for reporting error, husband’s number of partners was coded as: ≤2, >2, or missing. Values represent OR for >2.</p><p>vs. ≤2. We cannot test whether husband’s infidelity is associated with greater likelihood of GM due to non-overlapping datasets.</p>c<p>No literate woman presented genital ulcer or inflammatory PAP of fungal etiology.</p

Geographical distribution of risk factors for GM.

<p>Distribution of wife’s age at first intercourse and number of lifetime partners for both spouses are based on the GM sample and weighted to adjust for sample bias (see text). To calculate mean risk, wife’s age at first intercourse and number of lifetime partners for both spouses were converted to z-scores and averaged, with age at first intercourse reverse coded. Distribution of Spanish fluency and literacy are based on the sample of women that received medical exams. Circles represent location of study villages, and circle size indicates number of women sampled per village. Estimates are derived from generalized additive models controlling for age. Regions between villages are simulated by the model. Refer to Supplementary Material for geographical distribution without sample weights (<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0050384#pone.0050384.s003" target="_blank">figure S3</a>).</p

GEE analysis of effect of town proximity on likelihood of husband’s infidelity, controlling for wife’s age, presence of children

<p>GEE analysis of effect of town proximity on likelihood of husband’s infidelity, controlling for wife’s age, presence of children</p

Geographical distribution of GM from PAP tests.

<p>Circles represent location of study villages, and circle size indicates relative sample size. Estimates are derived from generalized additive models controlling for age and weighted to adjust for sample bias (see text). Regions between villages are simulated by the model. Refer to Supplementary Material for geographical distribution of gynecological exams (<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0050384#pone.0050384.s004" target="_blank">figure S4</a>), and geographical distribution of GM without sample weights (<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0050384#pone.0050384.s005" target="_blank">figure S5</a>).</p

Probability of husband’s infidelity by town proximity and wife’s age.

<p>Control variables in <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0050384#pone-0050384-t001" target="_blank">table 1</a> set to sample means (sample min. and max. for wife’s age = 12 and 77, respectively).</p

Prevalence of GM from: A) gynecological exams and B) PAP tests.

a<p>Sample size varies due to non-systematic missing data.</p>b<p>Three women with inflammation of unknown etiology were omitted. The PAP test of one woman revealed inflammation of multiple etiologies (bacterial/trichomonal) and was included.</p

Parameter estimates from OLS regressions of effects of town proximity, Spanish fluency, and literacy on sexual risk-taking.

<p>Models are adjusted for age.</p>***<p>p≤0.001;</p>**<p>p≤0.01;</p>*<p>p≤0.05; t p≤0.15.</p>a<p>Wife’s report.</p>b<p>Each parameter was evaluated independently (Ind), controlling for age. Starting from a full model, parameters were removed in a stepwise fashion until all parameters were significant at p≤0.10 (STEP). To estimate effects on number of lifetime partners (for husband and wife), age at marriage was not controlled as inclusion of this term reduced the effective sample size substantially (given missing data); on a sub-sample where data were available, inclusion of an age at marriage term does not significantly affect results.</p

Sample sizes and IgE by population and age category.

<p>Geometric mean values are in IU/ml. Values in parenthesis are plus or minus two standard deviations for log transformed values: e^µ±2*σ, where µ is the mean of ln(IgE) and σ is the standard deviation of ln(IgE).</p

Association between model parameters and population geometric mean IgE levels.

<p>The upper panel shows fits between age parameters and mean log IgE by population. The lower shows fits between slope parameters and geometric mean IgE by population. Note that the fit for B1 is linear with regard to log IgE, but is shown on the lower graph due to the parameter scale. Correlation coefficients for all parameters are given in the text.</p