Table 2.

Main effects model: multinomial regression of risk factors for recent IPV among heterosexual methamphetamine-using women and men in San Diego, CA, 2009–2011.

Independent variablea	Physical-only IPVb AOR (SE; 95% CI)	Sexual IPVb AOR (SE; 95% CI)
Gender	0.99 (0.41; 0.43, 2.33)	1.07 (0.43; 0.46, 2.48)
ref (0): Female; 1: Male
Age	1.01 (0.02; 0.97, 1.05)	1.00 (0.02; 0.97, 1.05)
Race/ethnicity	0.52 (0.45; 0.22, 1.28)	0.52 (0.46; 0.21, 1.25)
ref (0): White; 1: African American; 2: Hispanic; 3: Other
Annual income	0.88 (0.45; 0.36, 2.13)	0.54 (0.48; 0.21, 1.36)
ref (0): <$10,000; 1: ≥$10,000
Depression score	1.01 (0.02; 0.98, 1.05)	1.02 (0.02; 0.98, 1.05)
Average social support	0.47 (0.38; 0.22, 0.98)*	0.49 (0.37; 0.23, 0.97)*
Sexual relationship power	0.84 (0.36; 0.42, 1.69)	1.61 (0.37; 0.78, 3.30)
Unprotected sex in past two months	0.99 (0.01; 0.97, 1.01)	1.00 (0.01; 0.99, 1.02)
Meth use in the last 30 days	1.00 (0.02; 0.96, 1.05)	1.00 (0.02; 0.96, 1.05)
Number of sex partners	1.01 (0.04; 0.95, 1.09)	1.04 (0.03; 0.98, 1.11)
Risky sexual behaviors while high on meth	1.54 (0.20; 1.03, 2.29)*	1.80 (0.20; 1.21, 2.70)*
ref (0): Unlikely to engage in risky sexual behaviors while high on meth; 1: Likely to engage in risky sexual behaviors while high on meth

IPV intimate partner violence.

^aVariables without a description are continuous. Scoring is further described in the Methods section.

^bReference group (0): no recent IPV; 1: recent physical IPV only; 2: recent sexual IPV (with/without recent physical IPV).

^*p < 0.05.