Table 3. Associations Between Racial/Ethnic Zip Code Cluster and Store Type With Price Promotion and Exterior Advertisement, Los Angeles, California, 2016–2017.
| Regressors | Menthol Cigarette Retail Marketing Outcomes |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price Promotion, Any Cigarettesa | Price Promotion, Menthol Cigarettesa | Exterior Advertisement, Nonmenthol Cigarettesa | Exterior Advertisement, Menthol Cigarettesa | |
| Univariable modelb | ||||
| Race/ethnicity zip code cluster | ||||
| Black/African American | Reference | |||
| Korean American | 0.50 (0.29–0.86) [.01] | 0.51 (0.29–0.90) [.02] | 0.73 (0.44–1.21) [.22] | 0.50 (0.30–0.85) [.01] |
| Hispanic | 0.46 (0.30–0.72) [.001] | 0.48 (0.30–0.77) [.002] | 0.40 (0.25–0.62) [<.001] | 0.25 (0.15–0.40) [<.001] |
| Non-Hispanic White | 1.41 (0.95–2.12) [.09] | 1.46 (0.97–2.20) [.07] | 1.15 (0.77–1.72) [.51] | 0.66 (0.44–1.01) [.05] |
| Store type | ||||
| Gasoline/convenience store | Reference | |||
| Liquor store | 0.35 (0.21–0.58) [<.001] | 0.36 (0.20–0.63) [<.001] | 0.24 (0.12–0.47) [<.001] | 0.19 (0.10–0.37) [<.001] |
| Grocery store | 0.13 (0.07–0.23) [<.001] | 0.11 (0.05–0.22) [<.001] | 0.15 (0.10–0.25) [<.001] | 0.13 (0.07–0.24) [<.001] |
| Discount store | 0.27 (0.14–0.53) [<.001] | 0.17 (0.07–0.44) [<.001] | 0.36 (0.18–0.72) [.004] | 0.43 (0.20–0.93) [.03] |
| Tobacco-focused store | 0.43 (0.24–0.80) [.007] | 0.44 (0.26–0.77) [.004] | 1.53 (0.84–2.79) [.17] | 0.99 (0.51–1.92) [.97] |
| Otherc | 0.15 (0.06–0.43) [<.001] | 0.14 (0.04–0.45) [.001] | 0.64 (0.26–1.58) [.34] | 0.18 (0.05–0.63) [.007] |
| Multivariable modeld | ||||
| Race/ethnicity zip code cluster | ||||
| Black/African American | Reference | |||
| Korean American | 0.54 (0.21–1.36) [.19] | 0.56 (0.25–1.25) [.16] | 0.83 (0.38–1.83) [.64] | 0.58 (0.28–1.20) [.14] |
| Hispanic | 0.49 (0.28–0.86) [.01] | 0.51 (0.30–0.88) [.02] | 0.43 (0.21–0.88) [.02] | 0.25 (0.13–0.48) [<.001] |
| Non-Hispanic White | 1.33 (0.78–2.28) [.30] | 1.28 (0.77–2.12) [.35] | 0.90 (0.48–1.68) [.73] | 0.54 (0.31–0.92) [.03] |
| Store type | ||||
| Gasoline/convenience store | Reference | |||
| Liquor store | 0.35 (0.21–0.58) [<.001] | 0.36 (0.20–0.63) [<.001] | 0.24 (0.12–0.46) [<.001] | 0.19 (0.10–0.38) [<.001] |
| Grocery store | 0.14 (0.08–0.25) [<.001] | 0.12 (0.06–0.24) [<.001] | 0.16 (0.10–0.26) [<.001] | 0.14 (0.08–0.24) [<.001] |
| Discount store | 0.31 (0.16–0.59) [<.001] | 0.20 (0.08–0.50) [.001] | 0.38 (0.19–0.74) [.004] | 0.43 (0.20–0.91) [.03] |
| Tobacco-focused store | 0.38 (0.20–0.71) [.002] | 0.39 (0.23–0.68) [.001] | 1.39 (0.76–2.54) [.29] | 0.87 (0.46–1.67) [.68] |
| Otherc | 0.15 (0.05–0.43) [<.001] | 0.14 (0.04–0.46) [.001] | 0.62 (0.25–1.53) [.30] | 0.17 (0.05–0.60) [.006] |
a
Multilevel binary logistic regression models for each binary outcome. Values are odds ratio (95% CI) [P value].
b
Univariable models including individual racial/ethnic zip code cluster and store type regressor, separately. Unadjusted associations between each regressor and menthol cigarette retail marketing outcomes are shown.
c
Includes donut shops and gas kiosks.
d
Multivariable model including racial/ethnic zip code cluster and store type regressors simultaneously. Adjusted associations between each regressor and outcomes of menthol cigarette retail marketing are shown.