Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2012 Feb 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Immigr Minor Health. 2011 Feb;13(1):36–41. doi: 10.1007/s10903-010-9330-z

Table 4.

Estimated effects (odds ratio and 95% CI) of DARC status (negative vs. positive) and selected covariates on the incidence of prostate cancer among Jamaican men, by choice of covariates in the model (models 1–7): results of conditional logistic regression analyses

Covariate Model

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Lacks DARC 1.1 (0.52, 2.5) 1.1 (0.50, 2.4) 1.2 (0.44, 3.1) 1.1 (0.42, 3.1) 1.1 (0.41, 3.1) 1.1 (0.41, 3.1) 1.2 (0.32, 4.2)
Family history of prostate cancer 11 (2.5, 45) 10 (2.4, 44) 13 (2.4, 67) 10 (2.0, 52) 10 (1.9, 52) 10 (2.0, 55) 9.7 (1.6, 59)
History of sexually transmitted infection 0.71 (0.32, 1.6) 1.2 (0.46, 3.1) 1.2 (0.46, 3.1) 1.1 (0.42, 3.0) 1.1 (0.41, 3.0) 1.4 (0.43, 4.6)
Enlarged prostate 12 (3.0, 48) 12 (2.8, 50) 12 (2.8, 49) 11 (2.7, 48) 12 (2.4, 60)
Ever smoked 0.57 (0.20, 1.6) 0.58 (0.20, 1.6) 0.61 (0.21, 1.8) 0.58 (0.17, 2.1)
Eats meat 1.5 (0.24, 9.0) 1.5 (0.24, 9.2) 1.4 (0.22, 8.5)
BMI ≥30 vs.<30 1.4 (0.30, 6.4) 1.6 (0.26, 9.9)
Less educationa 3.8 (0.61, 23)

All odds-ratio estimates are adjusted for age (the matching variable) and other covariates in the model

a

Primary-school education vs. secondary-school or more education