Kuhrs et al. BMC Public Health 2012, 12:190 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/12/190 following diseases: stroke (p < 0.0001), diabetes mellitus (p = 0.01), cancer (p = 0.01), circulatory disturbances of the heart (p < 0.0001), circulatory disturbances in the legs (p = 0.002), heart disease (p < 0.0001) and choles- terol values (p = 0.002). Analytical evaluation Table 2 shows univariate odds ratios (OR) for all consid- ered potential risk factors (see above) with 95% confi- dence intervals (CI). Significant factors with particularly high univariate odds ratios are alcohol consumption with OR = 5.61 [95% CI, 2.65-11.87], smoking with OR = 3.22 [95% CI, 1.60-6.12], diabetes mellitus with OR = 2.53 [95% CI; 1.31-4.88], cholesterol with OR = 3.10 [95% CI, 1.58-6.07], and diabetes of the parents with OR = 4.53 [95% CI, 1.75-11.74]. After performing a backward-selection, the results given in Table 2 are obtained. This best model includes five risk factors, four of them mentioned above discuss- ing the univariate ORs (alcohol, smoking, diabetes, cho- lesterol). Additionally included is the consumption of sweets, while parental diabetes is no longer a significant risk factor. For alcohol consumption and smoking, OR = 3.68 [95% CI, 1.58-8.58] and OR = 3.07 [95% CI, 1.42- 6.62], respectively. For diabetes mellitus and high cho- lesterol values, OR = 3.29 [95% CI, 1.46-7.39] and OR = 2.32 [95% CI, 1.11-4.88], respectively. The almost Page 6 of 9 complete abdication of sweets is associated with a pro- tective effect, OR = 0.34 [95% CI, 0.18-0.64]. For men alone (data not shown in Table), a slightly different result is obtained (multivariate analysis). Cho- lesterol is no longer an important risk factor, while par- ental diabetes mellitus becomes important, with OR = 5.65 [95% CI; 1.62-19.70]. For alcohol consumption, OR = 4.26 [95% CI; 1.65-11.00]. OR = 3.16 [95% CI; 1.31- 7.63] for smoking, OR = 4.12 [95% CI; 1.43-11.87] for diabetes mellitus and OR = 0.32 [95% CI; 0.14-0.74] for the consumption of sweets, respectively. For women alone such a model cannot be estimated as no woman of the controls consumes alcohol. To compare the prevalence of the risk factors in the Aussiedler with the prevalence of these risk factors in the native German population, data from the literature were used [29-36] (Table 3). Alcohol consumption of the cases was calculated in g/day and compared to the percentage of men and women found in the literature [32] drinking more than 20 and 10 g/day, respectively. Age-weighted averages (according to the age distribution of the controls) of the literature data were calculated. Concerning alcohol consumption, both male and female Aussiedler reported less drinking than the native Ger- man population whereas smoking behavior - at least for men who constitute the majority in this study - is com- parable. Fruit and vegetable consumption show no Table 3 Prevalence of potential risk factors among controls and comparison with the native German population Prevalence of potential risk factors among Aussiedler (controls) in % Prevalence of the native German Literature/comments population in % Female 0 3.0 10.8b 18.9b 76.1 66.2 56.7 73.1 Male 30.5 58.9 17.9/9.8 13.1 13.1 69.7 48.4 79.4 49.6 67.5 Female 13.3 24.4 19.3/13.8 16.2 14.3 56.0 50.9 75.9 46.0 81.9 [32]c [35]c [30]c, [35] [29]c [33] new/old federal states [31]c > 300 mg/100 ml, > 25 kg/m2 [34]c 12 months prevalence, yes SBP ≥ 140 mmHg and/or DBP ≥ 90 mmHg [34]c [34]c Potential risk factors Alcohol (> 20 g/day for men) Alcohol (> 10 g/day for women) Smoking (yes) Diabetes mellitus (yes) Cholesterol (yes) BMI (> 25.0 kg/m2) High blood pressure (yes) No regular physical activity Fruit and vegetables (daily) Male 11.9a 59.0 9.3b 9.3b 68.4 57.8 71.6 73.8 a Only taking into account the age group 45-79 for comparison with literature b Only taking into account the age group 40-79 for comparison with literature c Age-weighted averages, according to age distribution in control group