Table 5.

Predictors of Pap Screening within Risk-Appropriate Guidelines and Their Significance from Final Multivariable Logistic Regression Model Along with Relevant Odds Ratios from Model (n = 762)

Effect	DF	Chi-square	Pr > ChiSqa	Comparison	Within group	OR (95% CI)	p valueb
Race	2	1.37	0.5040	African American vs. white	—	1.16 (0.83, 1.62)	0.392
				Native American vs. white	—	0.98 (0.72, 1.34)	0.910
Survey	1	13.72	0.0002	Follow-up vs. baseline	—	1.53 (1.25, 1.88)	<0.001
Treatment	1	0.06	0.8129	Intervention vs. control	—	1.03 (0.80, 1.32)	0.813
Survey × treatment	1	1.36	0.2437	Follow-up vs. baseline	Control group	1.38 (1.04, 1.82)	0.025
					Intervention group	1.70 (1.31, 2.21)	<0.001
Risk	1	26.60	<0.0001	Low risk vs. high risk	—	3.05 (1.97, 4.74)	<0.001
Survey × risk	1	3.41	0.0648	Follow-up vs. baseline	High risk	1.88 (1.54, 2.28)	<0.001
					Low risk	1.25 (0.87, 1.79)	0.221
Doctor recommendation	1	18.37	<0.0001	Doctor recommendation: Yes vs. no.	—	2.54 (1.66, 3.87)	<0.001
SES	1	6.62	0.0101	High SES vs. low SES	—	1.63 (1.11, 2.41)	0.013
Doctor recommendation × SES	1	9.81	0.0017	Doctor recommendation: Yes vs. no.	High SES	4.64 (2.19, 9.86)	<0.001
					Low SES	1.39 (1.04, 1.86)	0.028
Age group	3	22.71	<0.0001	50–59 vs. 40–49	—	0.86 (0.64, 1.17)	0.347
				60–69 vs. 40–49	—	0.73 (0.51, 1.05)	0.094
				70+ vs. 40–49	—	0.32 (0.20, 0.49)	<0.001
Doctor recommendation × age group	3	19.06	0.0003	Doctor recommendation: Yes vs. no.	Ages 40–49	1.53 (0.98, 2.39)	0.062
					Ages 50–59	3.62 (2.07, 6.33)	<0.001
					Ages 60–69	1.18 (0.59, 2.37)	0.638
					Ages 70+	6.33 (2.75, 14.6)	<0.001

^aScore statistics for type 3 GEE analysis.

^bAll p values are unadjusted for multiple hypothesis tests. The primary hypothesis is for the interaction of survey and treatment group along with the ORs for screening at follow-up vs. baseline for each treatment group, and other p values may be considered exploratory.