Table 3.
Multilevel logistic regression for experimental smoking (N=20,203)
| Odds Ratio (95% Confidence Interval) |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Experimental smoking |
|||
| Student level Model | Student + School Model | Full Model | |
| Student variables | |||
| Age (years) | ***1.17 (1.13, 1.22) | ***1.17 (1.13, 1.22) | ***1.17 (1.13, 1.22) |
| Gender | |||
| Male | 1.09 (0.97, 1.23) | 1.09 (0.97, 1.23) | 1.09 (0.97, 1.23) |
| Female | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Race/ethnicitya | |||
| White | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Hispanic/Latino | 1.08 (0.94, 1.24) | 0.98 (0.84, 1.14) | 0.98 (0.84, 1.14) |
| African American | **0.71 (0.54, 0.92) | **0.66 (0.51, 0.87) | **0.66 (0.50, 0.86) |
| Asian/Pacific Islander | 0.83 (0.68, 1.01) | *0.78 (0.64, 0.96) | *0.78 (0.64, 0.96) |
| American Indian/Alaskan Native | 1.21 (0.77, 1.90) | 1.18 (0.75, 1.85) | 1.18 (0.75, 1.85) |
| Grade point averagea | |||
| As | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Bs | ***1.62 (1.41, 1.87) | ***1.61 (1.40, 1.85) | ***1.61 (1.40, 1.85) |
| Cs | ***2.45 (2.07, 2.90) | ***2.42 (2.04, 2.86) | ***2.42 (2.04, 2.86) |
| Ds | ***4.30 (3.41, 5.41) | ***4.21 (3.35, 5.30) | ***4.22 (3.35, 5.31) |
| Peer smoking | |||
| Yes | ***2.40 (2.13, 2.71) | ***2.40 (2.12, 2.71) | ***2.40 (2.12, 2.71) |
| No | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Hopelessness | ***1.84 (1.63, 2.08) | ***1.84 (1.63, 2.07) | ***1.84 (1.63, 2.07) |
| School and school-neighborhood variables | |||
| Urban | -- | 1.19 (0.92,1.54) | 1.19 (0.92,1.55) |
| Mean parent education | -- | *0.89 (0.79,0.99) | BL1 0.88 (0.78,1.00) |
| Tobacco retailers density | -- | *1.09 (1.01,1.18) | BL2 1.09 (1.00,1.19) |
| County variables | |||
| Income inequalitya | |||
| Quartile 1 (low) | -- | -- | 1.00 |
| Quartile 2 | -- | -- | 0.95 (0.81, 1.13) |
| Quartile 3 | -- | -- | 1.03 (0.85, 1.25) |
| Quartile 4 (high) | -- | -- | 1.00 (0.80, 1.26) |
| Percentage population below poverty | -- | -- | 1.00 (0.98, 1.02) |
| Random-effects parameters | |||
| County standard deviation | 0.04 | < 0.000001 | < 0.000001 |
| School standard deviation | 0.23 | 0.19 | 0.19 |
| Model comparison | bχ (3)= 15.95 p=0.0012 | c χ(4)= 0.89 p=0.9253 | |
*
p ≤ 0.05
**
p ≤ 0.01
***
p ≤ 0.001
BL1
Borderline significance at p1=0.055
BL2
Borderline significance at p2=0.058.
a
Joint significance tests performed for race/ethnicity, grade point average and income inequality for each model. All tests p ≤ 0.01
b
The student plus school level model was compared with the student level model using the likelihood chi-squared statistic
c
The full model was compared with the student plus school level model using the likelihood chi-squared statistic