. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2008 Dec 10.

Published in final edited form as: J R Stat Soc Ser A Stat Soc. 2008 Oct;171(4):877–897. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-985X.2008.00544.x

Table 4.

Estimated odds ratios and 95% CIs for the latent class prevalences, assuming local independence LCA and class exchangeable local dependence with and without non-differential measurement fit to the EUDL CT under-age drinking data

	Results for the locally independent model		Results for the locally dependent model
	Risky versus non-problem	Regular versus non-problem	Non-differential		Differential
	Risky versus non-problem	Regular versus non-problem	Risky versus non-problem	Regular versus non-problem	Risky versus non-problem	Regular versus non-problem
Male	1.11 (0.85,1.50)	2.13 (1.39,3.28)	1.09 (0.81,1.47)	2.20 (1.40,3.44)	1.35 (0.98,1.86)	2.43 (1.52,3.87)
16−17 versus 14−15 years	1.32 (0.76,2.29)	4.29 (1.79,10.3)	1.33 (0.75,2.36)	4.57 (1.72,12.1)	1.37 (0.76,2.49)	4.80 (1.87,12.3)
18−20 versus 14−15 years	1.12 (0.62,2.03)	11.06 (4.56,26.80)	1.18 (0.65,2.17)	12.87 (4.79,34.63)	1.12 (0.61,2.06)	12.56 (4.89,32.27)
Marijuana use	5.80 (3.66,9.18)	14.07 (9.47,20.90)	6.65 (4.08,10.6)	16.15 (10.58,24.67)	6.85 (4.05,11.6)	17.56 (11.07,27.87)
Friends drunk	3.36 (2.11,5.36)	18.04 (11.22,28.98)	3.78 (2.36,6.06)	21.06 (14.35,30.91)	3.59 (2.21,5.83)	21.36 (14.58,31.28)