Your privacy, your choice

We use essential cookies to make sure the site can function. We also use optional cookies for advertising, personalisation of content, usage analysis, and social media.

By accepting optional cookies, you consent to the processing of your personal data - including transfers to third parties. Some third parties are outside of the European Economic Area, with varying standards of data protection.

See our privacy policy for more information on the use of your personal data.

for further information and to change your choices.
Skip to main content

Table 2 Comparison of respondents and non-respondents of the Australian Genomics Census showing chi-squared analysis

From: Building a learning community of Australian clinical genomics: a social network study of the Australian Genomic Health Alliance

 

Total (N)

Respondents (n, %)

Non-respondents (n, %)

χ 2

Females

202

122, (60.39%)

80, (39.60%)

χ2(1, N = 384) = 1.17, p = .28

Medical specialists

73

25, (34.25%)

48, (65.75%)

χ2(1, N = 384) = 20.52, p = < .05*

Genetic specialists

94

71, (75.79%)

23, (24.21%)

χ2(1, N = 384) = 16.02, p = < .05*

Medical scientists

100

52, (52.94%)

48, (44.12%)

χ2(1, N = 384) = 1.87, p = .17

Researcher^

42

27, (64.29%)

15, (35.71%)

χ2(1, N = 384) = 0.81, p = .37

Other

75

47, (62.67%)

28, (37.33%)

χ2(1, N = 384) = 0.90, p = .34

  1. *p < .05 significant. ^“Researchers” include biomedical, health services and sociological researchers, and “Other” includes operational staff, students and consumers
Back to article page

BMC Medicine

ISSN: 1741-7015

Contact us