Table 3.

Summary of 2-way regression analyses involving the polygenic risk scores, parental monitoring, and community disadvantage in predicting marijuana use disorders

Variable	Step 1			Step 2
	ORa (95% CIb)	p-value	Cox & Snell R2	OR (95% CI)	p-value	Cox & Snell R2
CD PRSc
Parental Monitoring			.015			.015
Sex	.40 (.23 – .68)	.001		.40 (.23 – .68)	.001
Intervention Status	.83 (.50 – 1.40)	.487		.83 (.50 – 1.40)	.488
CD PRS	1.13 (.88 – 1.44)	.356		1.12 (.87 – 1.44)	.371
Parental Monitoring	.71 (.43 – 1.18)	.181		.71 (.43 – 1.19)	.198
CD PRS × Parental Monitoring				.95 (.56 – 1.61)	.860
Community Disadvantage			.014			.017
Sex	.39 (.23 – .67)	.001		.39 (.23 – .67)	.001
Intervention Status	.81 (.48 – 1.36)	.425		.79 (.47 – 1.33)	.375
CD PRS	1.13 (.88 – 1.45)	.335		1.14 (.89 – 1.47)	.305
Community Disadvantage	1.08 (.83 – 1.40)	.562		1.02 (.78 – 1.34)	.876
CD PRS × Community Disadvantage				1.31 (1.00 – 1.72)	.049
ADHD PRSd
Parental Monitoring			.014			.017
Sex	.40 (.23 – .68)	.001		.40 (.23 – .68)	.001
Intervention Status	.83 (.49 – 1.39)	.479		.86 (.51 – 1.45)	.563
ADHD PRS	1.01 (.78 – 1.32)	.916		.98 (.75 – 1.29)	.899
Parental Monitoring	.70 (.42 – 1.16)	.166		.74 (.44 – 1.25)	.264
ADHD PRS × Parental Monitoring				.65 (.39 – 1.08)	.094
Community Disadvantage			.013			.016
Sex	.39 (.23 – .66)	.001		.38 (.22 – .66)	<.005
Intervention Status	.81 (.48 – 1.36)	.422		.81 (.48 – 1.35)	.414
ADHD PRS	1.03 (.79 – 1.34)	.834		1.04 (.80 – 1.35)	.788
Community Disadvantage	1.09 (.84 – 1.42)	.519		1.10 (.85 – 1.43)	.478
ADHD PRS × Community Disadvantage				1.26 (.98 – 1.63)	.078

^aOR = Odds ratio.

^bCI = Confidence interval.

^cCD PRS = Conduct disorder polygenic risk score.

^dADHD PRS = Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder polygenic risk score.