Table 3 Adjusted association between one‐parent versus two‐parent status and sexual abuse history (n = 186)*.
| Variable | Using proxies for CSES | Using CSES | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR | p Value | OR | p Value | |
| Parent number | ||||
| 1 | 2.39 | 0.05 | 2.38 | 0.07 |
| 2 | † | † | ||
| Age (years) | ||||
| 20–29 | † | (0.17)‡ | † | (0.20) |
| 30–39 | 2.84 | 0.08 | 2.70 | 0.08 |
| 40–49 | 2.83 | 0.09 | 1.88 | 0.29 |
| Race/ethnicity | ||||
| Caucasian | † | (0.17) | – | – |
| African‐American | 0.80 | 0.66 | – | – |
| Hispanic | 3.21 | 0.11 | – | – |
| Other/mixed | 0.65 | 0.73 | – | – |
| Sexual identity | ||||
| Gay/bisexual | 4.80 | 0.03 | 6.85 | 0.003 |
| Heterosexual | † | † | ||
| Education | ||||
| <12th grade/GED | † | (0.65) | – | – |
| High school degree | 0.54 | 0.36 | – | – |
| Some college | 1.00 | 0.99 | – | – |
| College/graduate degree | 1.17 | 0.82 | – | – |
| Income | ||||
| ⩽$20 000 | † | (0.56) | – | – |
| $20 001–40 000 | 1.60 | 0.42 | – | – |
| $40 001–75 000 | 0.70 | 0.58 | – | – |
| >$75 000 | 1.14 | 0.85 | – | – |
| CSES | ||||
| ⩽2 times poverty line | – | – | 0.65 | 0.36 |
| >2 times poverty line | – | – | † | |
| Model R2, p value§ | 0.22, 0.01 | 0.17, 0.003 | ||
| Hosmer/Lemeshow test p value¶ | 0.83 | 0.88 | ||
CSES, childhood socioeconomic status; GED, Graduate Equivalency Diploma.
*Analyses excluded 11 participants who did not live with either parent.
†Comparison group for each variable.
‡For variables with more than two subgroups, overall p value for variable, determined across all subgroups, is presented in parentheses.
§Nagelkerke R2 is reported; this value varies from 0 to 1 and provides logistic analogy to R2 reported for ordinary least squares (OLS) regression models.
¶High p value for Hosmer and Lemeshow goodness‐of‐fit test indicates failure to reject the null hypothesis that there is no difference between observed and predicted values of the dependent value, implying that model's estimates fit data at an acceptable level.