Complaint/Site Matched 75 22 .004 10.5 .014 Physicians (1.6-69.7) 1-P calculated using Pearson’s chi-square test. 2-Adjusted odds ratio, 95% confidence interval, and P value calculated using adjusted conditional logistic model. SDC 2 -2. Sensitivity Analyses Excluding Cases (n=3) in which the physician’s patient complaints were the first signal that raised concerns of probable or possible neurocognitive disorder Cases Comparison p Adjusted Odds p (n=12) Physicians Ratio (95% value2 (% with at least (n=48) confidence interval)2 one word related (% with at least to cognitive one word related impairment) to cognitive impairment) Age/Sex Matched 67 8 <.001 65.2 (6.0-711.3) <.001 Physicians Complaint/Site Matched 67 17 <.001 14.1 (2.8-71.0) <.001 Physicians 1-P calculated using Pearson’s chi-square test. 2-Adjusted odds ratio, 95% confidence interval, and P value calculated using adjusted conditional logistic model.
Complaint/Site Matched Physicians 75 22 .004 10.5 (1.6-69.7) .014 1-P calculated using Pearson’s chi-square test. 2-Adjusted odds ratio, 95% confidence interval, and P value calculated using adjusted conditional logistic model. SDC 2 -2. Sensitivity Analyses Excluding Cases (n=3) in which the physician’s patient complaints were the first signal that raised concerns of probable or possible neurocognitive disorder Cases (n=12) (% with at least one word related to cognitive impairment) Comparison Physicians (n=48) (% with at least one word related to cognitive impairment) p Adjusted Odds Ratio (95% confidence interval)2 p value2 Age/Sex Matched Physicians 67 8 <.001 65.2 (6.0-711.3) <.001 Complaint/Site Matched Physicians 67 17 <.001 14.1 (2.8-71.0) <.001 1-P calculated using Pearson’s chi-square test. 2-Adjusted odds ratio, 95% confidence interval, and P value calculated using adjusted conditional logistic model.
1-s2.0-S1064748118302999-mmc2.docx