TABLE 2.
Adjusted Odds Ratios (ORs) for Perceived Smoking Prevalence and Acceptability of Smoking Among Youths Living With a Smoker and Those Living With Nonsmokers: Massachusetts, 2001–2006
| Higher Perceived Prevalence of
Adult Smoking in Towna |
Social Acceptability of Smoking
by Adults in Townb |
Social Acceptability of Smoking
by Youths in Townc |
||||
| Lived With Smoker, OR (95% CI) | Lived With Nonsmokers, OR (95% CI) | Lived With Smoker, OR (95% CI) | Lived With Nonsmokers, OR (95% CI) | Lived With Smoker, OR (95% CI) | Lived With Nonsmokers, OR (95% CI) | |
| Main time-varying predictor variable (level 1) | ||||||
| Presence of a complete smoking ban in household | ||||||
| Yes (Ref) | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| No | 1.56* (1.15, 2.13) | 1.75* (1.29, 2.37) | 1.55* (1.21, 1.99) | 1.53* (1.26, 2.22) | 1.66 (0.93, 2.98) | 1.04 (0.58, 1.89) |
| Individual-level time-varying covariates (level 1) | ||||||
| Age group, y | ||||||
| 12–14 (Ref) | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| 15–17 | 0.76** (0.59, 0.99) | 0.93 (0.74, 1.18) | 0.93 (0.71, 1.23) | 1.09 (0.88, 1.35) | 1.59** (0.97, 2.60) | 2.20* (1.40, 3.48) |
| 18–21 | 0.65 (0.40, 1.05) | 0.66 (0.41, 1.09) | 0.97 (0.59, 1.60) | 0.86 (0.76, 1.73) | 0.81 (0.37, 1.92) | 0.82 (0.45, 2.56) |
| Self-reported baseline smoking status | ||||||
| Nonsusceptible never smoker (Ref) | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Susceptible never smoker | 0.92 (0.68, 1.26) | 0.92 (0.74, 1.15) | 0.86 (0.61, 1.21) | 1.12 (0.89, 1.42) | 0.84 (0.42, 1.68) | 0.75 (0.42, 1.33) |
| Puffed | 1.02 (0.60, 1.75) | 1.04 (0.72, 1.51) | 1.29 (0.88, 1.91) | 1.34 (0.84, 2.15) | 1.37 (0.63, 2.98) | 0.65 (0.25, 1.67) |
| Smoked whole cigarette | 0.91 (0.57, 1.47) | 1.53 (0.98, 2.41) | 1.15 (0.73, 1.80) | 1.04 (0.67, 1.63) | 2.21 (0.99, 4.94) | 0.87 (0.35, 2.18) |
| Smoked in past 30 d | 1.43 (0.84, 2.45) | 1.47 (0.73, 2.96) | 1.45 (0.85, 2.48) | 1.54 (0.99, 2.38) | 1.86 (0.88, 3.93) | 1.64 (0.72, 3.74) |
| Presence of close friend who smokes | ||||||
| No (Ref) | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Yes | 1.63* (1.15, 2.30) | 1.06 (0.79, 1.42) | 1.25 (0.92, 1.69) | 1.44* (1.13, 1.83) | 1.18 (0.70, 2.01) | 1.38 (0.84, 2.29) |
| Participated in 4-y follow-up (wave 1 to wave 3) | ||||||
| No (Ref) | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Yes | 1.58 (0.73, 3.41) | 0.76 (0.40, 1.44) | 0.81 (0.43, 1.51) | 1.10 (0.55, 2.18) | 2.59** (0.89, 5.22) | 3.52* (1.53, 8.12) |
| Baseline attitude | 4.09* (2.98, 5.64) | 4.14* (3.26, 5.27) | 2.78* (2.03, 3.80) | 3.06* (2.41, 3.90) | 1.64 (0.77, 3.50) | 3.37* (1.48, 7.70) |
| Individual-level covariates (level 2) | ||||||
| Gender | ||||||
| Boy (Ref) | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Girl | 0.81 (0.59, 1.10) | 0.97 (0.77, 1.23) | 0.94 (0.74, 1.20) | 0.79** (0.64, 0.97) | 0.84 (0.56, 1.25) | 0.59** (0.39, 0.91) |
| Race/ethnicity | ||||||
| Non-Hispanic White (Ref) | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Other | 1.60** (1.07, 2.38) | 1.50** (1.06, 2.11) | 0.92 (0.63, 1.35) | 1.61* (1.18, 2.20) | 1.64 (0.97, 2.76) | 1.60** (0.95, 2.72) |
| Household income, $ | ||||||
| ≤ 50 000 (Ref) | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| > 50 000 | 0.61* (0.44, 0.84) | 0.62* (0.45, 0.86) | 0.88 (0.64, 1.22) | 1.10 (0.85, 1.44) | 1.16 (0.74, 1.81) | 0.87 (0.51, 1.50) |
| Informant education | ||||||
| Not college graduate (Ref) | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| College graduate | 0.57* (0.41, 0.80) | 0.90 (0.68, 1.20) | 0.83 (0.60, 1.15) | 0.90 (0.72, 1.12) | 0.68 (0.43, 1.08) | 0.76 (0.48, 1.18) |
| Town-level covariates (level 3)d | ||||||
| Percentage “yes” vote on Question 1e | 0.55* (0.45, 0.67) | 0.55* (0.46, 0.64) | 0.85** (0.70, 1.03) | 0.72* (0.63, 0.81) | 0.96 (0.67, 1.35) | 0.72* (0.53, 0.96) |
| Percentage of residents who are White | 0.96 (0.86, 1.08) | 1.03 (0.93, 1.13) | 0.87** (0.78, 0.97) | 1.12** (1.01, 1.24) | 0.99 (0.84, 1.19) | 1.15 (0.92, 1.44) |
| Percentage of residents who are youths | 1.05 (0.71, 1.54) | 0.78 (0.56, 1.07) | 1.11 (0.78, 1.58) | 0.95 (0.72, 1.27) | 0.61 (0.34, 1.10) | 0.38 (0.21, 0.69) |
Note. CI = confidence interval.
Perceived prevalence of adult smoking in town was coded as 0 (lower perception of smoking prevalence; reference category) and 1 (higher perception of smoking prevalence). Analyses were on the basis of 942 individuals living in 234 towns, contributing a total of 1391 observations for youths living with smokers, and on 1728 individuals living in 280 towns, contributing a total of 2631 observations for youths living without smokers.
Social acceptability of smoking by adults in town was coded as 0 (perceived adult disapproval of adult smoking; reference category) and 1 (no perceived disapproval of adult smoking). Analyses were on the basis of 942 individuals living in 234 towns, contributing a total of 1394 observations for youths living with smokers, and on 1720 individuals living in 280 towns, contributing a total of 2619 observations for youths living without smokers.
Social acceptability of smoking by youths in town was coded as 0 (perceived adult disapproval of youth smoking; reference category) and 1 (no perceived disapproval of youth smoking). Analyses on the basis of 941 individuals living in 234 towns, contributing a total of 1393 observations for youths living with smokers and analyses on the basis of 1725 individuals living in 280 towns, contributing a total of 2628 observations for youths living without smokers.
Odds ratio associated with each 10-percentage-point increase in variable.
Question 1 was a 1992 ballot initiative that increased the cigarette tax and created a statewide tobacco control program.
*P < .01; **P < .05.