Table 3.
Participant characteristics and real-time risk factors for momentary tobacco marketing exposure (i = 5,285 surveys, n = 146)
| ORa | 95% CI | P-value | AORa,b | 95% CI | P-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline covariates | ||||||
| Biological sex | 0.3047 | 0.3251 | ||||
| Male | Reference | Reference | ||||
| Female | 0.7 | 0.3–1.5 | 0.7 | 0.3–1.4 | ||
| Age | 0.4050 | 0.9588 | ||||
| 18–20 | 1.3 | 0.7–2.7 | 1.1 | 0.6–2.3 | ||
| 21–24 | Reference | Reference | ||||
| Race/ethnicity | 0.0296 | 0.1873 | ||||
| Non-Hispanic White | Reference | Reference | ||||
| Non-Hispanic Black | 2.1 | 1.0–4.4 | 1.8 | 0.9–3.7 | ||
| Hispanic | 3.6 | 1.5–8.6 | 2.1 | 0.9–5.2 | ||
| Non-Hispanic other | 1.4 | 0.6–3.2 | 1.2 | 0.5–2.7 | ||
| Highest completed education level | 0.5644 | 0.7895 | ||||
| High school degree or less | 1.6 | 0.6–3.8 | 3.5 | 1.0–12.0 | ||
| Some college or in college | 1.6 | 0.8–3.1 | 1.9 | 0.7–5.2 | ||
| College degree and higher | Reference | Reference | ||||
| Ever tobacco use | 0.6560 | 0.2997 | ||||
| Never used | Reference | Reference | ||||
| Ever used | 1.2 | 0.6–2.2 | 1.4 | 0.7–2.5 | ||
| Vulnerable community residence | 0.0007 | 0.0138 | ||||
| No | Reference | Reference | ||||
| Yes | 3.5 | 1.7–7.2 | 2.6 | 1.2–5.4 | ||
| EMA time-varying covariates | ||||||
| Saw anyone using tobacco products | 0.0001 | <0.0001 | ||||
| No | Reference | Reference | ||||
| Yes | 6.3 | 3.9–10.2 | 4.0 | 2.4–6.7 | ||
| Current location and activity | 0.0001 | <0.0001 | ||||
| Home | Reference | Reference | ||||
| Work/school/chores | 1.1 | 0.5–2.2 | 1.1 | 0.5–2.2 | ||
| Party/club/other social places | 2.0 | 0.7–6.2 | 1.6 | 0.5–4.9 | ||
| Bar/restaurant | 2.9 | 1.2–7.1 | 2.6 | 1.0–6.5 | ||
| Outside/in transit | 5.5 | 3.0–10.3 | 4.1 | 2.1–7.8 | ||
| Store/other retail | 25.2 | 9.8–64.9 | 17.0 | 6.4–44.8 | ||
| Online/social mediac | 2.4 | 1.1–5.1 | 2.0 | 0.9–4.4 | ||
| Other location | 6.0 | 1.9–18.9 | 5.4 | 1.7–17.1 |
a Bolded p-values are statistically significant p < 0.05.
b The intraclass correlation for the null models was 0.28.
c Respondents reported being online or using social media at the time of the prompt regardless of their physical location.