Table 3.
Logistic regression model of ever receiving cervical cancer screening (n=164)
| Screening ever | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (SE) | OR (95%) | |
| Sociodemographics | ||
| Age | 0.062 (0.017)*** | 1.064 (1.028–1.101) |
| Live-in partner (vs no) | 0.052 (0.221) | 1.110 (0.466–2.644) |
| Education beyond HS (vs HS or less) | 0.038 (0.241) | 1.078 (0.419–2.775) |
| Income 10k–20k (vs <10k) | −0.026 (0.324) | 1.253 (0.452–3.471) |
| Income >20k (vs <10k) | 0.278 (0.368) | 1.698 (0.522–5.525) |
| Employed (vs no) | 0.281 (0.222) | 1.753 (0.735–4.183) |
| Regular provider (vs no) | 0.221 (0.223) | 1.557 (0.649–3.732) |
| Cervical cancer awareness | ||
| Talked to doctor about testing (vs no) | 0.201 (0.246) | 1.495 (0.571–3.913) |
| Heard of HPV (vs no) | 0.450 (0.260) | 2.458 (0.886–6.814) |
| Heard of HPV vaccine (vs no) | 0.154 (0.265) | 1.361 (0.482–3.846) |
| Cervical cancer risk factor knowledge | 0.310 (0.121)* | 1.363 (1.075–1.728) |
| Model chi-square (df=11) | 27.598 | |
*p < 0.05, *p<0.01, ***p<0.001