Table 2.
Multivariable Analysis of Factors Associated with the Largest ZIP Code-level Declines in Rates of Late HIV Diagnoses, New York City, 2003 to 2010
| Number of neighborhoods (ZIP codes) | Model 1 Crude OR (95 % CI) | Model 2 aOR (95 % CI) | Model 3 aOR (95 % CI) | Model 4 aOR (95 % CI) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Males | |||||
|
|
|||||
| Change╪ in HIV testing coverage | |||||
| No/Low, (0.09 %) | 63 | 1.00 (Ref) | 1.00 (Ref) | 1.00 (Ref) | 1.00 (Ref) |
| Medium, (8.6 %) | 53 | 2.00 (0.85, 4.71) | 2.34 (0.93, 5.90) | 2.22 (0.92, 5.33) | 2.14 (0.86, 5.36) |
| Large, (18.0 %) | 55 | 3.05 (1.34, 6.97)** | 3.22 (1.31, 7.89)* | 3.16 (1.35, 7.40)** | 3.88 (1.57, 9.62)** |
| Change╪ in non-late HIV diagnoses | |||||
| No/Low, (−20 per 100,000 population) | 57 | 1.00 (Ref) | 1.00 (Ref) | 1.00 (Ref) | |
| Medium, (−2.7 per 100,000 population) | 58 | 0.37 (0.16, 0.87)* | 0.34 (0.14, 0.82)* | 0.45 (0.18, 1.15) | |
| Large, (7.1 per 100,000 population) | 56 | 0.81 (0.37, 1.76) | 0.71 (0.32, 1.57) | 1.03 (0.43, 2.47) | |
| Borough of residence at HIV diagnosis | |||||
| Queens | 57 | 1.00 (Ref) | 1.00 (Ref) | 1.00 (Ref) | |
| Bronx | 39 | 5.09 (1.80, 14.4)** | 6.63 (2.18, 20.14)** | 6.62 (2.12,20.60)** | |
| Brooklyn | 38 | 1.62 (0.60, 4.37) | 2.13 (0.75, 6.04) | 2.08 (0.73, 5.96) | |
| Manhattan | 25 | 3.08 (1.49, 9.69)** | 1.94 (1.83, 13.35)** | 4.37 (1.57,12.11)** | |
| Staten Island | 12 | 0.94 (0.18, 4.96) | 1.10 (0.20, 6.12) | 1.05 (0.19, 05.98) | |
| Females | |||||
|
|
|||||
| Change╪ in HIV testing coverage | |||||
| No/Low, (0.05 %) | 63 | 1.00 (Ref) | 1.00 (Ref) | 1.00 (Ref) | 1.00 (Ref) |
| Medium, (8.0 %) | 51 | 1.46 (0.56, 3.77) | 1.27 (0.47, 3.45) | 1.03 (0.37, 2.88) | 0.97 (0.32, 2.92) |
| Large, (15.6 %) | 57 | 1.72 (0.70, 4.27) | 1.46 (0.57, 3.79) | 1.61 (0.60, 4.34) | 1.52 (0.54, 4.31) |
| Change╪ in non-late HIV diagnoses | |||||
| No/Low, (−22 per 100,000 population) | 58 | 1.00 (Ref) | 1.00 (Ref) | 1.00 (Ref) | |
| Medium, (−2.2 per 100,000 population) | 79 | 0.17 (0.07, 0.44)** | 0.18 (0.07, 0.46)** | 0.18 (0.07, 0.48)** | |
| Large, (18 per 100,000 population) | 34 | 0.46 (0.16, 1.23) | 0.47 (0.17, 1.26) | 0.62 (0.21, 1.78) | |
| Borough of residence at HIV diagnoses | |||||
| Queens | 57 | 1.00 (Ref) | 1.00 (Ref) | 1.00 (Ref) | |
| Bronx | 39 | 4.00 (1.21,13.17)* | 3.80 (1.11, 12.94)* | 2.53 (0.68, 09.35) | |
| Brooklyn | 38 | 3.34 (1.11, 09.99)* | 3.72 (1.18, 11.76)* | 3.99 (1.17, 13.59)* | |
| Manhattan | 25 | 2.27 (0.72, 07.16) | 2.32 (0.73, 07.37) | 2.79 (0.37, 15.83) | |
| Staten Island | 12 | 1.70 (0.30, 09.67) | 2.10 (0.35, 12.64) | 2.44 (0.37, 15.83) | |
*
p<.05,
**
p<.01,
╪
mean of the continuous distribution within each tertile is reported in (parentheses)
OR= Odds Ratio, aOR= Adjusted Odds Ratio, CI= Confidence Interval
Model 1: Crude association for each variable
Model 2: Change in HIV testing + Change in non-late HIV diagnoses
Model 3: Change in HIV testing + NYC Borough
Model 4: Change in HIV testing + Change in non-late HIV diagnoses + NYC Borough