TABLE 5.

AMEs Estimated After Multivariate Logistic Regression Modeling of “Entering the Dental Care System” During the 25-Month Median Follow-up Period Among the Participating COHL Study Child–Caregiver Dyads (N = 1000)

Characteristic	Model 1: Dental System Entry (Comprehensive Examination or Emergency Visit)			Model 2: Dental System Entry via Comprehensive Examination Only
	AME	95% CI	P	AME	95% CI	P
Child oral health status
Excellent/very good/good	0.00	Ref		0.00	Ref
Fair/poor	0.22	0.01 to 0.44	.04	0.10	−0.01 to 0.30	.3
Child’s age (years; ordinal categorical)	0.09	0.05 to 0.13	<.0005	0.08	0.04 to 0.12	<.0005
Caregiver’s age (years; quartiles)	0.02	−0.02 to 0.06	.4	0.01	−0.03 to 0.05	.7
Gender
Male	−0.09	−0.28 to 0.10	.3	0.00	−0.20 to 0.19	.9
Female	0.00	Ref		0.00	Ref
Race
White	0.00	Ref		0.00	Ref
African American	0.02	−0.07 to 0.11	.7	0.08	−0.01 to 0.17	.09
American Indian	−0.02	−0.12 to 0.09	.8	0.01	−0.09 to 0.12	.8
Education (ordinal categorical)	0.01	−0.05 to 0.06	.8	0.01	−0.05 to 0.06	.7
No. of children
1	0.00	Ref		0.00	Ref
2	0.04	−0.05 to 0.14	.4	−0.01	−0.11 to 0.08	.8
3	−0.04	−0.16 to 0.08	.5	−0.02	−0.14 to 0.10	.7
≥4	−0.09	−0.24 to 0.05	.2	−0.10	−0.24 to 0.04	.2
Dental neglect (normalized DNS score)a	−0.07	−0.11 to –0.03	.001	−0.05	−0.09 to –0.01	.01
Reported barrier of access to the dental care system at enrollment interview
Yes	0.10	−0.02 to 0.21	.1	0.08	−0.03 to 0.19	.2
No	0.00	Ref		0.00	Ref
Health literacy (comprehension)
Low (NVS: 0–1)	0.00	Ref		0.00	Ref
Moderate (NVS: 2–3)	0.00	−0.12 to 0.11	.9	−0.02	−0.13 to 0.10	.8
Higher (NVS: 4–6)	0.05	−0.07 to 0.18	.4	0.01	−0.11 to 0.13	.9

^aEstimate corresponds to 1 SD increase in DNS score.