Analysis of dog-bite injury hospitalisations in Manitoba, Canada, 1984–2006*
| Independent variables | Model 1: all ages | Model 2: age <20 years | ||||
| β | Risk ratio† (95% CI) | p Value | β | Risk ratio† (95% CI) | p Value | |
| Jurisdiction with BSL versus Jurisdiction without BSL (before BSL)‡ | 0.05 | 1.05 (0.98 to 1.13) | 0.167 | 0.08 | 1.08 (1.06 to 1.10) | <0.0001 |
| Jurisdiction with BSL versus Jurisdiction without BSL (after BSL)‡ | 0.06 | 1.06 (0.98 to 1.14) | 0.097 | 0.01 | 1.00 (0.99 to 1.01) | 0.203 |
| Urban versus rural‡ | −0.33 | 0.72 (0.66 to 0.78) | <0.0001 | −0.34 | 0.71 (0.70 to 0.71) | <0.0001 |
↵* Analysis: negative binomial regression with repeated measures (generalised estimating equations); Dependent variable (continuous)=case count (dog-bite injury hospitalisations) for calendar year per jurisdiction; Offset variable=log of population count; no. of observations=414.
↵† Denotes magnitude of difference in rate of dog-bite injury hospitalisations associated with each unit increase in explanatory variable when all other variables are held constant.
↵‡ Reference category.
BSL, breed-specific legislation.