. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2018 Feb 1.

Published in final edited form as: J Am Coll Health. 2016 Nov 2;65(2):103–111. doi: 10.1080/07448481.2016.1254638

Table 2.

Adjusted multinomial logistic regression of perceived harm of e-cigarettes and cigarettes.

	E-cigarettes						Cigarettes
	Medium vs extreme harm^a			No/low vs extreme harm^a			Medium vs extreme harm^b			No/low vs extreme harm^b
Cigarette use	OR^c	95% CI	p value^d	OR^c	95% CI	p value^d	OR^c	95% CI	p value^d	OR^c	95% CI	p value^d
Nonuser (reference)	1.00		—	1.00		—	1.00		—	1.00		—
Cigarette only	1.12	0.89–1.40	.330	1.20	1.01–1.43	.043	2.26	1.77–2.89	<.001	3.12	1.68–5.82	<.001
E-cigarette only	1.37	0.97–1.93	.077	2.97	2.08–4.26	<.001	0.90	0.66–1.22	.493	2.03	0.93–4.41	.073
E-cigarette + cigarette	2.02	1.40–2.93	<.001	3.48	2.76–4.38	<.001	2.10	1.59–2.79	<.001	2.29	1.10–4.76	.027

Note. The Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test: χ² = 10.66, p = .830; reference is extreme harm.

The Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test: χ² = 25.13, p = .068; reference is extreme harm.

Odds ratios adjusted for sex, race/ethnicity, age, total number of other tobacco products (cigars, hookah, and smokeless tobacco), mother’s education, father’s education, and school type.

Bolded p values indicate significance when α < .05.