. 2010 Apr;35(2):245–251. doi: 10.4103/0970-0218.66877

Table 3.

Association between the site of residence and educational status and tobacco use

Gender	Site of residence (Reference=urban)		Educational status (Reference=higher secondary school and above)
	Rural	Urban-slum	No schooling/less than primary	Completed primary school	Secondary school completed
Current daily tobacco use	2	1.7	5.8	2.3	1.7
	(1.7-2.3)^a	(1.4-2.0)^a	(4.8-7.1)^a	(1.9-2.8)^a	(1.4-2.1)^a
Daily smoking	2.3	2	4.4	2	1.7
	(2.5-3.5)^a	(1.7-2.4)^a	(3.6-5.4)^a	(1.7-2.5)^a	(1.4-2.1)^a
Cigarettes use	0.4	0.8	0.3	0.5	0.6
	(0.3-0.6)^a	(0.6-1.0)	(0.2-0.7)^a	(0.3-0.8)^a	(0.4-0.9)^a
Bidi use	3.2	2.5	4.4	2.4	2
	(2.6-3.8)^a	(2.1-3.0)^a	(3.6-5.3)^a	(2.0-3.0)^a	(1.6-2.4)^a
Hookah/pipe/chillum use	15.9	4	3	1.8	1.2
	(8.8-28.9)^a	(2.1-7.6)^a	(2.0-4.4)^a	(1.2-2.9)^a	(0.7-1.9)
Daily smokeless tobacco use	0.4	0.8	2.8	1.7	1.3
	(0.3-0.6)^a	(0.7-1.1)	(2.1-3.6)^a	(1.2-2.3)^a	(1.0-1.8)
Gutkha use	0.3	0.7	1.8	1.7	0.8
	(0.2-0.5)^a	(0.5-1.1)	(1.1-3.0)^a	(1.0-2.8)	(0.4-1.5)
Khaini use	0.6	1	3.2	1.7	1.8
	(0.4-0.8)^a	(0.7-1.3)	(2.3-4.5)^a	(1.2-2.6)^a	(1.2-2.5)^a

Figures represent the odds ratio (95% confidence intervals) based on logistic regression analysis with age (years), gender, and occupation as covariates. While calculating odds ratio for association of educational status with tobacco use, analysis was restricted to 25- to 64-year-old respondents.

Represents statistically significant results with a P value of less than 0.05.