Table 4.

Multivariate logistic regression analyses predicting preference to wait and see among 1,051 survey respondents, by panel including or not including toughness as a predictor^a

	Wait-and-see approach to treatment
	Panel 1b: Toughness not included		Panel 2c: Toughness included
Predictor	OR	95% CI	OR	95% CI
Female (reference: male)	.58*	.33–1.02	.63	.35–1.12
Race (reference: white)
Black	3.00	.80–11.28	2.82	.80–9.97
Asian	2.63	.87–7.94	2.50	.73–8.53
Other	.20	.05–.90	.25	.05–1.18
Hispanic origin (reference: non-Hispanic)	1.12	.45–2.81	.98	.37–2.61
Age	.99	.97–1.01	.99	.97–1.00
Unable to go to doctor because of costd	1.24	.52–2.95	1.34	.56–3.20
Education
High school diploma versus no diploma	1.76	.89–3.45	1.74	.87–3.46
Some college versus high school diploma	.66	.26–1.64	.76	.30–1.93
College degree versus some college	.58	.26–1.30	.67	.29–1.54
Advanced degree versus college degree	.84	.45–1.58	.94	.49–1.81
Depression symptomse	.98	.92–1.04	.97	.91–1.04
Toughnessf	—		1.14**	1.04–1.27

^aPreference to wait and see if symptoms resolved without treatment; survey was conducted using the California Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System.

^bPseudo-R2=.06, df=1,039

^cPseudo-R2=.11, df=1,038

^dIndicator of lower socioeconomic status

^eAssessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire 9-item depression scale (PHQ–9); scores range from 0 to 27, with higher scores indicating greater depression.

^fAssessed using the Tough Image Scale; scores range from 4 to 20, with higher scores indicating greater toughness.

^*p<.04

^**p<.01