Table 4.

Effect Modifiers of Neighborhood Disorganization on Past Year Use

	Alcohol Odds Ratio (95% CI)	Cigarettes Odds Ratio (95% CI)	E-cigarettes Odds Ratio (95% CI)	Marijuana Odds Ratio (95% CI)
Resistance self-efficacy
Main neighborhood effect	0.81 (0.43, 1.54)	0.27 (0.09, 0.77)*	0.3 (0.11, 0.81)*	0.53 (0.25, 1.11)
Main modifier effect	0.31 (0.23, 0.43)***	0.17 (0.10, 0.28)***	0.26 (0.16, 0.4)***	0.2 (0.14, 0.29)***
Interaction effect	1.08 (0.88, 1.33)	1.48 (1.11, 1.97)**	1.49 (1.15, 1.93)**	1.3 (1.04, 1.63)*
LRT (p-value)	0.434	0.006	0.002	0.017
Peer Affiliation
Main neighborhood effect	1.33 (0.82, 2.17)	2.06 (1.14, 3.72)*	1.72 (1.07, 2.76)*	2.7 (1.53, 4.75)***
Main modifier effect	2.46 (1.9, 3.19)***	3.01 (2.10, 4.32)***	2.34 (1.71, 3.21)***	3.72 (2.8, 4.93)***
Interaction effect	0.92 (0.77, 1.1)	0.76 (0.60, 0.97)*	0.86 (0.69, 1.06)	0.76 (0.63, 0.91)**
LRT (p-value)	0.387	0.022	0.147	0.004
Parental Monitoring
Main neighborhood effect	1.74 (0.7, 4.33)	1.93 (0.73, 5.12)	1.38 (0.56, 3.41)	1.8 (0.72, 4.49)
Main modifier effect	0.64 (0.43, 0.96)*	0.77 (0.48, 1.23)	0.68 (0.44, 1.04)	0.59 (0.39, 0.89)*
Interaction effect	0.91 (0.7, 1.18)	0.89 (0.66, 1.19)	1.01 (0.77, 1.31)	0.95 (0.73, 1.24)
LRT (p-value)	0.462	0.796	0.962	0.722

Notes: Estimates are from models adjusted for age, sex, race/ethnicity, mother’s education, whether or not the participant was in the intervention group at Wave 1, and a separate indicator for whether in college at follow-up,;. CI = confidence interval, LRT = likelihood ratio test comparing model with versus without interaction

^*p-value < 0.05

^**p-value <0.01

^***p-value < 0.001.