Table 2.
Negative Binomial Hierarchical Regression Results for Negative Consequences Outcome
| Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variables | IRR (95% CI) | IRR (95% CI) | IRR (95% CI) | ||||
| Drinking intensity | |||||||
| Moderate (ref.) | |||||||
| Binge | ~ | ~ | 6.89 (5.50, 8.64) | 6.62 (5.18, 8.48) | 6.62 (5.17, 8.48) | ||
| HID | ~ | ~ | 14.89 (11.34, 19.56) | 13.67 (9.85, 18.97) | 13.68 (9.86, 18.99) | ||
| Hours spent drinking | ~ | ~ | ~ | ~ | 1.03 (0.97, 1.08) | 1.03 (0.97, 1.08) | |
| Sex (male=1) | ~ | ~ | ~ | ~ | ~ | ~ | 0.92 (0.72, 1.18) |
| Variance component | |||||||
| Person level | 0.62 (.158) | 0.56 (.114) | 0.57 (.115) | 0.57 (.115) | |||
| Model fit | |||||||
| AIC | 3886.08 | 3221.47 | 3214.03 | 3215.64 | |||
| Intraclass correlation coefficient | 0.11 | 0.16 | 0.16 | 0.16 | |||
Notes. Data are from drinking days only. Non-drinking days are not included. Bolded indicates statistical significance: p<.05; for Models 1 and 2, day N=1938; person N=609; for Models 3 and 4, day N=1928; person N=605; IRR=Incident Rate Ratio.