Table 3.

Goodness-of-fit of partial age-period-cohort models by country and histological type

CountryModel
Age
Age-drift
Age-period
Age-cohort
df×2Pdf×2Pdf×2Pdf×2P
Denmark
    All cancers1001,334<0.00199225.9<0.00190185.8<0.00181162.0<0.001
    Seminomas90709.7<0.00189153.3<0.00180138.8<0.00172116.2<0.001
    Nonseminomas90789.2<0.00189202.1<0.00180114.80.00772154.4<0.001
Norway
    All cancers80752.8<0.00179147.7<0.00172138.1<0.0016366.20.37
    Seminomas72335.2<0.00171106.80.0046494.70.0085649.40.72
    Nonseminomas72453.2<0.0017189.90.0664*56
Sweden
    All cancers70831.2<0.00169135.1<0.00163125.2<0.0015469.40.08
    Seminomas63504.7<0.00162112.7<0.00156100.4<0.0014860.40.11
    Nonseminomas63409.3<0.00162101.60.0015682.80.014878.70.003
Finland
    All cancers80480.8<0.00179117.10.00472100.10.026370.30.25
    Seminomas72176.1<0.0017175.50.396456§
    Nonseminomas72356.3<0.00171101.50.016488.30.025672.80.07
  • NOTE: Based on Pearson statistics.

  • * P = 0.20, comparison of the age-drift-period model with the age-drift model.

  • P = 0.05, comparison of the age-drift-cohort model with the age-drift model.

  • P = 0.40, comparison of the age-drift-period model with the age-drift model.

  • § P = 0.06, comparison of the age-drift-cohort model with the age-drift model.