Table 2.
Association between e-cigarette retailer proximity and ever and current e-cigarette use, 2017–18 COMPASS study (N = 63,400 students, N = 122 high schools).
| Ever used e-cigarettes |
Currently used e-cigarettes |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| % | AOR (95% CI)a | % | AOR (95% CI)b | ||
| E-cigarette retailer proximity | |||||
| Model 1: any retailers within 500 m | No | 36.53 | 1.00 | 22.23 | 1.00 |
| Yes | 33.10 | 1.04 (0.68, 1.60) | 20.65 | 1.29 (0.71, 2.33) | |
| Model 2: any retailers within 1000 m | No | 37.08 | 1.00 | 22.65 | 1.00 |
| Yes | 32.81 | 0.92 (0.75, 1.13) | 19.65 | 1.01 (0.76, 1.34) | |
| Model 3: any retailers within 1500 m | No | 37.13 | 1.00 | 22.52 | 1.00 |
| Yes | 33.79 | 1.01 (0.85, 1.20) | 20.93 | 1.12 (0.88, 1.42) | |
| E-cigarette retailer density | |||||
| Model 4: each additional retailer within 500 m | – | 1.04 (0.68, 1.60) | – | 1.29 (0.71, 2.33) | |
| Model 5: each additional retailer within 1000 m | – | 0.98 (0.88, 1.10) | – | 1.04 (0.89, 1.21) | |
| Model 6: each additional retailer within 1500 m | – | 1.00 (0.95, 1.05) | – | 1.03 (0.96, 1.10) | |
From separate logistic regression models examining the likelihood of ever using e-cigarettes (n = 23,089) versus never using e-cigarettes (n = 40,311) for e-cigarette retailer proximity at each distance (i.e., 500 m, 1000 m, 1500 m) and e-cigarette retailer density at each distance, controlling for relevant factors.
From separate logistic regression models examining the likelihood of currently using e-cigarettes (n = 14,063) versus not currently using e-cigarettes (n = 49,337) for e-cigarette retailer proximity at each distance and e-cigarette retailer density at each distance, controlling for relevant factors.