Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2006 Jun 1.
Published in final edited form as: Pediatrics. 2004 Mar;113(3 Pt 1):e190–e196. doi: 10.1542/peds.113.3.e190

TABLE 4.

Logistic Regression Analysis of the Factors Associated With Lens Services in Urban and Rural Counties*

Urban, OR (95% CI) Rural, OR (95% CI)
Age, y
 ≤5 0.12 (0.11-0.13) 0.14 (0.12-0.16)
 6-8 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference)
 9-13 2.00 (1.91-2.09) 1.95 (1.78-2.14)
 14-16 2.21 (2.10-2.33) 2.34 (2.12-2.59)
 17-18 1.88 (1.77-2.01) 1.97 (1.75-2.22)
Gender
 Male 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference)
 Female 1.36 (1.31-1.40) 1.24 (1.17-1.32)
Race/ethnicity
 Hispanic or nonwhite 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference)
 Non-Hispanic white 1.37 (1.32-1.41) 0.95 (0.85-1.06)
Medicaid insurance type
 Mostly managed care 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference)
 Mixed fee-for-service/managed care 1.01 (0.96-1.06) 0.92 (0.84-1.01)
 Mostly fee-for-service 1.68 (1.56-1.81) 1.05 (0.94-1.18)
Eye care supply in county of residence
 Low (<25th percentile) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference)
 Medium (25th-75th percentile) 0.69 (0.63-0.76) 1.07 (0.99-1.15)
 High (>75th percentile) 0.67 (0.61-0.74) 0.99 (0.91-1.09)
*

Overall, rural children had greater odds of receiving lens services (adjusted OR: 1.22; P < .001). ORs and 95% CIs are adjusted for all factors listed.