Table 3. Association of Cumulative Disadvantage Index and Survey Year With Smoking Status Among 278 048 Respondents, 2008 to 2017.

No. of Disadvantages	Association of Cumulative Disadvantage With Smoking Status Collapsed Across Survey Years, OR (95% CI)a			Time Trend Analysis for Association With Current vs Never Smoking Statusb
	Current vs Never Smoker	Current vs Former Smoker	Former vs Never Smoker	Disadvantage × Survey Year Interaction Variable, P Valuec,d,e	Survey Year Variable Stratified by Disadvantage Status, OR (95% CI)c,e
0	1 [Reference]	1 [Reference]	1 [Reference]	1 [Reference]	0.95 (0.94-0.96)f
1	2.34 (2.27-2.43)f	1.82 (1.75-1.88)f	1.29 (1.25-1.33)f	.03f	0.96 (0.95-0.97)f
2	3.55 (3.39-3.72)f	2.58 (2.44-2.73)f	1.38 (1.32-1.43)f	<.001f	0.98 (0.97-0.99)f
3	5.35 (5.05-5.66)f	3.52 (3.31-3.75)f	1.52 (1.43-1.61)f	.001f	0.99 (0.97-1.01)
4	8.59 (7.91-9.34)f	4.79 (4.33-5.30)f	1.79 (1.60-2.01)f	.002f	1.00 (0.97-1.03)
5 or 6	14.70 (12.30-17.50)f	7.12 (5.80-8.74)f	2.06 (1.61-2.64)f	.69	0.96 (0.90-1.04)

Abbreviation: OR, odds ratio.

^aAssociation between regressor and respective smoking status pairwise contrast in multivariable polytomous regression models that included the respective disadvantage variable and with adjustment for sex, race/ethnicity, age, survey year, and region weighted to the US population.

^bTime trend analysis of footnote a.

^cYear treated as a 10-level continuous variable (2008-2017).

^dInteraction term added in subsequent model; all other results are from models that excluded interaction term.

^eTotal number of the following disadvantages faced: unemployed, poverty, low education, disability/limitation, serious psychological distress, and heavy drinking. The Methods section gives the operational definition of each form of disadvantage. The eMethods in the Supplement describes disability/limitation.

^fStatistically significant after Benjamini-Hochberg correction to maintain studywise false discovery rate at 0.05.