Table 3.

Impact of explanatory variables on tanning bed use (general & frequent)

	General tanning bed use (n = 1078)*			Frequent tanning bed use (n = 318)**
Variable/determinants	OR	95% CI	p	OR	95% CI	p
Hazardousness UV***	1.283	.982 – 1.678	<.07	.960	.593 – 1.555	.869
Perceived Personal Risk***	1.000	.758 – 1.318	.999	.989	.605 – 1.618	.965
„Tanning is attractive“	1.732	1.297 – 2.313	<.001	1.398	.830 – 2.355	.207
„Tanned skin is healthy“	.856	.650 – 1.128	.270	2.387	1.489 – 3.826	<.001
„Sun feels good“	.933	.712 – 1.223	.615	1.885	1.170 – 3.038	<.01

*Binary logistic regression with respect to general tanning bed use. Odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals. Tanning bed use dichotomized: users (1)/non-users (0). (User n = 317; non-user n = 761, Nagelkerke's Pseudo-R² = 0.022)

**Binary logistic regression with respect to frequent tanning bed use. Odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals. Tanning bed use dichotomized: high-frequent users (1) vs. low-frequent users (0). (High-frequent Users n = 138; low-frequent user (< 10 sessions per year & tanning bed users who had not tanned in the last 12 months) n = 180, Nagelkerke's Pseudo-R² = .107)

*** As defined in the Methods Section.