Skip to main content
. 2024 Jul 9;8:e52503. doi: 10.2196/52503

Table 5.

Logistic regression: scenario 2 (social networking site users’ assessments of accuracy).


Odds ratio (95% CI) SE (robust) P value
Experimental group (1=treatment) 1.319 (0.877-1.986) 0.275 .18
Reliance on social media for health information (reference: not at all)

Not very much 1.969 (1.105-3.508) 0.580 .02

A little 2.049 (1.178-3565) 0.579 .01

A great deal 2.659 (1.394-5074) 0.876 .003
Trust in public health officials (reference: don’t trust at all)

Don’t really trust 3.098 (1.389-6.913) 1.269 <.001

Trust to a degree 9.556 (4.458-20.484) 3.718 <.001

Trust a lot 20.850 (8.211-52.947) 9.914 .006

Unsure 3.190 (0.873-11.652) 2.108 .08
Political affiliation (reference: Democrat)

Independent or Other 0.608 (0.335-1.105) 0.185 .10

Republican 0.253 (0.137-0.468) 0.079 <.001

Nonvoter 0.242 (0.123-0.476) 0.084 <.001
Age (log-transformed) 0.683 (0.527-0.885) 0.090 .004
Sex (reference: male)

Female 0.857 (0.558-1.316) 0.188 .48
Race (reference: White)

African American or Black 0.736 (0.400-1.355) 0.229 .32

Other 0.869 (0.464-1.626) 0.278 .66
Hispanic (1=yes) 1.065 (0.657-1.725) 0.262 .79
4-year degree (1=yes) 1.504 (0.962-2.349) 0.342 .07
Constant 0.748 (0.207-2.698) 0.489 .65
−2 log likelihood –284.935 (—a)
Pseudo R2 0.216 (—)

aNot applicable