TABLE 3.
Multivariate Logistic Regression Models of the Association Between Smoking, Individual Factors, and Neighborhood Factors Among Asian Americans: California Health Interview Survey, 2003
| Model 1, OR (95% CI) | Model 2, OR (95% CI) | |
| Asian men (n = 1693) | ||
| Age, y | ||
| 18–29 (Ref) | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| 30–39 | 1.38 (0.70, 2.72) | 1.39 (0.71, 2.74) |
| 40–49 | 1.62 (0.91, 2.89) | 1.73 (0.96, 3.09) |
| 50–64 | 0.93 (0.51, 1.72) | 0.92 (0.50, 1.72) |
| ≥ 65 | 0.46* (0.23, 0.93) | 0.48* (0.24, 0.97) |
| Increasing % poverty income ratioa | 0.98 (0.81, 1.19) | 1.03 (0.84, 1.26) |
| Increasing educationb | 0.76** (0.66, 0.92) | 0.76** (0.62, 0.92) |
| Employed | 0.95 (0.55, 1.62) | 0.95 (0.56, 1.63) |
| Married | 0.57* (0.36, 0.90) | 0.60* (0.38, 0.95) |
| Frequent mental distress | 2.93*** (1.59, 5.39) | 2.84*** (1.52, 5.31) |
| Percentage of life lived in the United Statesc | 1.00 (0.99, 1.00) | 1.00 (0.99, 1.01) |
| Language spoken at home | ||
| Speaks English at home (Ref) | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Speaks English and other language at home | 1.37 (0.76, 2.48) | 1.38 (0.75, 2.54) |
| Does not speak English at home | 1.38 (0.72, 2.66) | 1.33 (0.67, 2.63) |
| Neighborhood SESd | 0.98 (0.80, 1.19) | |
| Neighborhood social cohesione | 0.74** (0.61, 0.91) | |
| Living in a census tract that has high concentration of Asians ( ≥ 50% Asian) | 1.07 (0.61, 1.88) | |
| Asian women (n = 2174) | ||
| Age, y | ||
| 18–29 (Ref) | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| 30–39 | 1.54 (0.63, 3.75) | 1.53 (0.63, 3.70) |
| 40–49 | 2.01 (0.78, 5.15) | 2.01 (0.81, 4.99) |
| 50–64 | 1.32 (0.52, 3.33) | 1.33 (0.53, 3.33) |
| ≥ 65 | 0.60 (0.19, 1.91) | 0.59 (0.19, 1.85) |
| Increasing % poverty income ratioa | 1.14 (0.84, 1.56) | 1.15 (0.83, 1.61) |
| Increasing educationb | 0.84 (0.64, 1.11) | 0.84 (0.63, 1.10) |
| Employed | 0.84 (0.64, 1.11) | 1.19 (0.60, 2.37) |
| Married | 0.36*** (0.21, 0.63) | 0.36*** (0.21, 0.63) |
| Frequent mental distress | 3.60*** (1.84, 7.05) | 3.56*** (1.81, 7.01) |
| Percentage of life lived in the United Statesc | 1.01 (1.00, 1.02) | 1.01 (1.00, 1.02) |
| Language spoken at home | ||
| Speaks English at home (Ref) | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Speaks English and other language at home | 0.52 (0.24, 1.11) | 0.54 (0.25, 1.16) |
| Does not speak English at home | 0.33* (0.12, 0.88) | 0.36* (0.13, 0.96) |
| Neighborhood SESd | 1.01 (0.75, 1.38) | |
| Neighborhood social cohesione | 1.00 (0.78, 1.30) | |
| Living in a census tract that has high concentration of Asians ( ≥ 50% Asian) | 0.27* (0.08, 0.88) | |
Note. OR = odds ratio; CI = confidence interval; SES = socioeconomic status. Model 1 only includes individual-level factors; Model 2 includes individual- and neighborhood-level factors.
Percentage Poverty income ratio was treated as a continuous variable in the models. It had 4 levels: 0% to 99%, 100% to 199%, 200% to 299%, and 300% or more of the federal poverty level.
Education was treated as a continuous variable in the models. It had 4 levels: less than high school, high school diploma, some college, and college degree or more.
ORs presented in this row correspond with a 20% increase in the percentage of life spent living in the United States.
Neighborhood SES was measured by a factor score of concentrated affluence, concentrated poverty, percentage of college-educated residents, and the percentage of house ownership. Higher scores indicate higher stock of socioeconomic resources in the neighborhood.
Neighborhood social cohesion was measured by reported perceptions of the extent of social connectedness, trust, and solidarity among neighbors. Higher scores indicate higher levels of social cohesion in the neighborhood.
*P ≤ .05; **P ≤ .01; ***P ≤ .001.