Table 4.
Betel leaf/betel quid chewing among Orang Asli and their associated factors by multiple logistic regression (MLR)
| Variable | Chewer n (%) | Non-chewer n (%) | b | SLR Crude OR (95% CI) | p-value | b | MLR Adjusted OR (95% CI) | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (continuous) | Mean = 49.6 | Mean = 38.3 | 0.113 | 1.119 (1.070, 1.171) | < 0.001 *** | 0.119 | 1.126 (1.071, 1.183) | < 0.001 *** |
| Gender | ||||||||
| Male | 55 (87.3%) | 8 (12.7%) | Ref. | Ref. | – | Ref. | Ref. | – |
| Female | 55 (67.1%) | 27 (32.9%) | 0.217 | 1.243 (0.646, 2.390) | 0.509 | 0.217 | 1.243 (0.484, 3.194) | 0.647 |
| Education Level | 0.940 | |||||||
| No formal education | 13 (100.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | Ref. | Ref. | – | Ref. | Ref. | – |
| Primary school | 60 (75.9%) | 19 (24.1%) | –1.034 | 0.356 (0.042, 3.009) | 0.338 | 0.421 | 1.523 (0.128, 18.171) | 0.740 |
| Lower secondary | 12 (80.0%) | 3 (20.0%) | –1.792 | 0.167 (0.017, 1.620) | 0.128 | 0.185 | 1.203 (0.081, 17.819) | 0.898 |
| Upper secondary | 23 (69.7%) | 10 (30.3%) | –1.792 | 0.167 (0.021, 1.299) | 0.105 | 0.493 | 1.637 (0.127, 21.063) | 0.710 |
| Tertiary education | 2 (40.0%) | 3 (60.0%) | –2.890 | 0.056 (0.004, 0.863) | 0.037 * | –0.381 | 0.683 (0.027, 17.271) | 0.820 |
| Household Income | 0.479 | |||||||
| < RM1199 | 45 (76.3%) | 14 (23.7%) | Ref. | Ref. | – | Ref. | Ref. | – |
| – RM1200–RM2341 | 50 (76.9%) | 15 (23.1%) | 0.217 | 1.242 (0.547, 2.819) | 0.610 | 0.030 | 1.031 (0.384, 2.771) | 0.952 |
| >RM2342 | 15 (71.4%) | 6 (28.6%) | –0.160 | 0.852 (0.280, 2.591) | 0.778 | –0.867 | 0.420 (0.086, 2.056) | 0.269 |
Forward LR Multiple Logistic Regression Model was applied. Multicollinearity and interaction terms were checked and not found. Hosmer-Lemeshow test (p = 0.685), classification table (overall correctly classified percentage = 82.8%), and area under the curve (AUC = 0.849) were applied to check the model fitness
P-value is significant at p < 0.05*