Table 3.
Results of the GEE Analyses Testing the Baseline Country Differences,the Change Over Time for Each Country, and the Country × Time Interaction forLabel-Relevant Outcome Variables
| Salience | Cognitive | Behavioral | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Notice | Read | Risk | Quit | Forgo | Avoid | |
| Baseline differences | ||||||
| Thailand vs. Malaysia | 1.77** | 1.51* | 4.80*** | 2.22*** | 0.84 | 2.81*** |
| Change over time | ||||||
| Waves 2 vs. 1 | ||||||
| Thailand | 1.96*** | 1.79*** | 1.91*** | 1.61*** | 1.54*** | 1.91*** |
| Malaysia | 0.80 | 0.96 | 0.88 | 0.63 | 0.59** | 0.94 |
| Waves 3 vs. 2 | ||||||
| Thailand | 1.41** | 0.98 | 1.29* | 1.30** | 1.17* | 1.35*** |
| Malaysia | 1.28 | 1.02 | 0.90 | 0.92 | 0.79 | 0.77 |
| Waves 3 vs. 1 | ||||||
| Thailand | 2.77*** | 1.75*** | 2.47*** | 2.10*** | 1.80*** | 2.58*** |
| Malaysia | 1.02 | 0.98 | 0.79 | 0.58* | 0.47*** | 0.72 |
| Change over time × country interaction | ||||||
| Waves 2 vs. 1 | ||||||
| Thailand vs. Malaysia | 2.46*** | 1.86* | 2.16* | 2.56** | 2.59*** | 2.04** |
| Waves 3 vs. 2 | ||||||
| Thailand vs. Malaysia | 1.10 | 0.96 | 1.44 | 1.42 | 1.49* | 1.74 |
| Waves 3 vs. 1 | ||||||
| Thailand vs. Malaysia | 2.71*** | 1.79* | 3.12*** | 3.63*** | 3.86*** | 3.56** |
Note. FM = factory-made cigarettes; GEE = generalized estimated equation; RYO = roll-your-own cigarettes. All figures in the table are odds ratios adjusted for age, sex, cohort, urban/rural, income, education, ethnicity, smoking frequency, cigarettes smoked per day, and type of products smoked (RYO only vs. any FM).
*p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001; p values were adjusted for multiple comparisons using the Benjamini–Hochberg method to control the false discovery rate (Benjamini & Hochberg, 1995).