Skip to main content
. 2012 May 17;9:E98. doi: 10.5888/pcd9.110312

Table 2. Odds of Missing School Because of Asthma Among School-Aged Children With Diagnosed Asthma (N = 1,276), California Health Interview Survey, 2007a .

Characteristic Model 1, OR (95% CI) P Value Model 2, OR (95% CI) P Value
Age y
4–10 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA
11–14 0.47 (0.29–0.78) .003 0.48 (0.29–0.78) .003
15–17 0.22 (0.12–0.41) <.001 0.24 (0.13–0.45) <.001
Sex
Male 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA
Female 1.40 (0.93–2.13) .11 1.35 (0.89–2.05) .16
Race/ethnicity
White 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA
Latino 1.25 (0.79–2.00) .35 1.09 (0.67–1.76) .74
Asian 1.02 (0.41–2.55) .97 1.01 (0.41–2.48) .99
African American 1.34 (0.63–2.82) .45 1.18 (0.55–2.51) .67
Mixed race 0.43 (0.20–0.94) .04 0.41 (0.17–0.96) .04
Insured during past year
Insured all year 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA
Uninsured all or part of year 0.79 (0.39–1.61) .52 0.81 (0.41–1.60) .54
How often had asthma symptoms in past year
Less than monthly 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA
At least monthly 2.17 (1.31–3.60) .003 2.29 (1.40–3.74) .001
Exposure to smoking at home
No smoking in home 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA
Smoking ≥1 d/wk 2.14 (0.99–4.64) .06 2.04 (0.92–4.50) .08
Currently taking prescription medication to control asthma
No 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA
Yes 4.29 (2.77–6.67) <.001 4.22 (2.74–6.52) <.001
Family income, % FPG
<186 2.16 (1.27–3.68) .005 1.81 (1.05–3.12) .03
186–399 0.99 (0.60–1.61) .95 0.89 (0.53–1.50) .67
≥400 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA
Students eligible for free or reduced-price meals at school, %
<25 NA NA 1 [Reference] NA
25–49 NA NA 1.20 (0.69–2.21) .52
50–74 NA NA 1.31 (0.72–2.40) .38
≥75 NA NA 1.99 (1.07–3.71) .03

Abbreviations: OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; NA, not applicable; FPG, federal poverty guidelines.

a The final analysis was limited to 1,276 children for whom data on the proportion of students at the school who participated in the meal program could be linked. Analyses adjusted for all variables displayed for each model. Model 1 did not include school-level socioeconomic status, indicated by percentage of students eligible for free or reduced-price meals. Results were weighted to be representative of the California population and were adjusted for complex survey design effects.