TABLE 3.
Multilevel Stepwise Analysis for Adolescent Indoor Tanning in 100 Most Populous US Cities With Predictors Selected From the Individual and City Level Using Generalized Linear Mixed Effects Models: CITY100, 2005–2007
| Variables Remaining in Modela | Adjusted OR (95% CI) | P |
| Adolescent age, y | ||
| 14 (Ref) | 1.00 | .003 |
| 15 | 1.10 (0.74, 1.60) | |
| 16 | 1.50 (1.00, 2.10) | |
| 17 | 1.80 (1.20, 2.60) | |
| Adolescent sex | ||
| Female (Ref) | 1.00 | |
| Male | 0.42 (0.26, 0.68) | <.001 |
| Adolescent race | ||
| Non-Hispanic White (Ref) | 1.00 | .019 |
| Non-Hispanic Black | 0.20 (0.06, 0.67) | |
| Hispanic White | 0.62 (0.33, 1.20) | |
| Otherb | 0.75 (0.53, 1.10) | |
| Adolescent weekly allowance | ||
| $0–$10 (Ref) | 1.00 | <.001 |
| $11–$25 | 1.40 (0.98, 1.90) | |
| > $25 | 2.10 (1.50, 3.00) | |
| Adolescent sun sensitivity | ||
| Always burns, never tans | 0.42 (0.26, 0.68) | |
| Usually burns, hard to tan | 0.66 (0.48, 0.92) | |
| Sometimes burns, then tans | 0.92 (0.70, 1.20) | |
| Rarely burns, easily tans (Ref) | 1.00 | .001 |
| Parent ever indoor tanned | ||
| No (Ref) | 1.00 | |
| Yes | 1.70 (1.30, 2.20) | <.001 |
| Parent: people with a tan look more attractive | ||
| Agree | 1.50 (1.10, 2.00) | .005 |
| Disagree (Ref) | 1.00 | |
| Parent: concerned if adolescent tanned occasionally | ||
| Not a lot (Ref) | 1.00 | |
| A lot | 0.58 (0.45, 0.74) | <.001 |
| Adolescent: parents allow me to tan | ||
| Strongly or somewhat disagree (Ref) | 1.00 | |
| Strongly or somewhat agree | 4.80 (3.60, 6.30) | <.001 |
| % of adolescent's friends who have ever tanned indoors with tanning lamps (20% unit increase) | 1.80 (1.60, 1.90) | <.001 |
| Adolescent: indoor tanning can cause skin cancer | ||
| Disagree or don't know (Ref) | 1.00 | |
| Agree | 1.60 (1.00, 2.40) | .043 |
| Adolescent: getting an indoor tan first protects from burning in the sun | ||
| Disagree or don't know (Ref) | 1.00 | |
| Agree | 2.00 (1.60, 2.50) | <.001 |
| Adolescent: people with a tan look more attractive | ||
| Strongly or somewhat disagree (Ref) | 1.00 | |
| Strongly or somewhat agree | 1.80 (1.30, 2.50) | <.001 |
| Proximity: does adolescent live within 2 mi of a tanning facility | ||
| No (Ref) | 1.00 | |
| Yes | 1.40 (1.00, 1.90) | .028 |
Notes. CI = confidence interval; CITY100 = Correlates of Indoor Tanning in Youth study; OR = odds ratio.
Variables at the adolescent level of analysis that were removed from earlier versions of this model, in order of elimination, were: has adolescent ever noticed ads for indoor tanning, is adolescent happy with appearance, does adolescent know anyone personally who has had skin cancer, does adolescent think having a tan makes people look healthier, does adolescent think most of his or her friends like to be tanned, household income, does adolescent think people who tan have already damaged their skin, how often adolescent protects skin in summer, parent education, and does parent agree that indoor tanning can cause skin cancer (P = .96). Variables at the city level of analysis that were removed from earlier versions of this model, in order of elimination, were: log physical size of city, mean number of days per week facilities would allow a adolescent to tan, does adolescent live in a city with a state law addressing minors’ use of indoor tanning, and city's tanning facility density (P = .92–.32).
American Indian, Asian, Pacific Islander, multiethnic/multiracial, and other–unspecified.