Table 2.
Full Sample Logistic Regression Models Predicting Out-of-Home Placement Between Waves I and IV
| Model (1) (n= 3129) |
Model (2) (n= 2840)a |
Model (3) (n=2824)a |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR | (95%CI) | OR | (95%CI) | OR | (95%CI) | |
| Intercept | 0.09*** | [0.05, 0.15] | 0.03*** | [0.01, 0.09] | 0.03*** | [0.01, 0.09] |
| Child age | ||||||
| 0-2 | 1.00 | [1.00, 1.00] | 1.00 | [1.00, 1.00] | 1.00 | [1.00, 1.00] |
| 3-5 | 1.25 | [0.63, 2.49] | 0.99 | [0.48, 2.03] | 1.09 | [0.51, 2.32] |
| 6-10 | 0.71 | [0.36, 1.39] | 0.53* | [0.28, 0.97] | 0.59 | [0.32, 1.07] |
| 11+ | 0.88 | [0.46, 1.66] | 0.55 | [0.26, 1.14] | 0.58 | [0.29, 1.17] |
| Child Race | ||||||
| Black | 1.93 | [0.92, 4.04] | 1.74 | [0.79, 3.84] | 1.90 | [0.86, 4.21] |
| White | 1.00 | [1.00, 1.00] | 1.00 | [1.00, 1.00] | 1.00 | [1.00, 1.00] |
| Hispanic | 0.72 | [0.32, 1.66] | 0.90 | [0.36, 2.27] | 0.94 | [0.39, 2.27] |
| Other | 1.07 | [0.42, 2.75] | 0.82 | [0.31, 2.15] | 0.75 | [0.27, 2.03] |
| Maltreatment | ||||||
| Physical /sexual abuse | 0.65 | [0.41, 1.05] | 0.81 | [0.50, 1.32] | 0.87 | [0.54, 1.40] |
| Neglect | 1.00 | [1.00, 1.00] | 1.00 | [1.00, 1.00] | 1.00 | [1.00, 1.00] |
| Other | 1.30 | [0.42, 4.07] | 1.38 | [0.52, 3.65] | 1.43 | [0.53, 3.85] |
| Substantiation | ||||||
| Substantiated | 1.36 | [0.84, 2.21] | 0.85 | [0.50, 1.43] | 0.60 | [0.34, 1.05] |
| Medium risk/Not | 1.00 | [1.00, 1.00] | 1.00 | [1.00, 1.00] | 1.00 | [1.00, 1.00] |
| Family income | ||||||
| <5K-9999 | 1.00 | [1.00, 1.00] | 1.00 | [1.00, 1.00] | ||
| 10K-19999 | 0.88 | [0.47, 1.64] | 0.89 | [0.49, 1.62] | ||
| 20K-29999 | 0.51 | [0.23, 1.12] | 0.49 | [0.23, 1.06] | ||
| 30K-39999 | 0.89 | [0.31, 2.59] | 0.81 | [0.30, 2.19] | ||
| 40K+ | 0.22** | [0.09, 0.54] | 0.24*** | [0.10, 0.54] | ||
| CTS Physical Assault Total | 1.02* | [1.00, 1.04] | 1.02* | [1.00, 1.04] | ||
| Combined CIDI | ||||||
| Yes | 1.47 | [0.85, 2.54] | 1.36 | [0.80, 2.31] | ||
| No | 1.00 | [1.00, 1.00] | 1.00 | [1.00, 1.00] | ||
| Prior History | ||||||
| 0 | 1.00 | [1.00, 1.00] | 1.00 | [1.00, 1.00] | ||
| 1-2 | 2.18* | [1.16, 4.09] | 1.90* | [1.00, 3.60] | ||
| 3-4 | 2.52** | [1.31, 4.85] | 1.73 | [0.93, 3.24] | ||
| Family Risk Score | ||||||
| 0-1 | 1.00 | [1.00, 1.00] | 1.00 | [1.00, 1.00] | ||
| 2-3 | 1.73 | [0.68, 4.38] | 1.33 | [0.56, 3.17] | ||
| 4-5 | 4.12** | [1.69, 10.07] | 2.45* | [1.07, 5.60] | ||
| 6+ | 4.70*** | [1.97, 11.23] | 2.53* | [1.07, 6.01] | ||
| Service | ||||||
| IH no CWS | 1.00 | [1.00, 1.00] | ||||
| IH CWS | 1.24 | [0.71, 2.15] | ||||
|
Likelihood of abuse in the next 12
months without CW services |
||||||
| Low/very low | 1.00 | [1.00, 1.00] | ||||
| High/very high | 3.13*** | [1.76, 5.57] | ||||
*
p<0.05
**
p<0.01
***
p<0.001
a
Sample size changes from Model 1 to Model 2 because some of the variables in Model 2 come from parent interviews and some parents were unavailable or refused to be interviewed. All variables in Model 1 come from the case record. The small decrease from Model 2 to Model 3 is due to missing data on the caseworker’s estimate of abuse in the subsequent 12 months if the family receives no services.