Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2012 Jan 1.
Published in final edited form as: Am J Public Health. 2010 Mar 18;101(1):112–119. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2009.173112

TABLE 3.

Logistic Regression Results for Main Effects and Interactions of Neighborhood Income and Place: Toronto, ON, and San Francisco, CA, 1996–2006

Predictor Variables OR (95% CI)
Significant main effects
 Age at diagnosis 0.62 (0.56, 0.69)
 Stage at diagnosisa 0.20 (0.16, 0.24)
 Gender (female advantaged) 1.32 (1.06, 1.64)
 Received surgery 3.40 (1.89, 6.12)
 > 15 regional lymph nodes examined 1.57 (1.16, 2.13)
 Received chemotherapy 1.53 (1.04, 2.25)
Significant interaction effects
 Neighborhood income by place 2.57 (1.47, 4.49)
 Neighborhood income by place by stage at diagnosis 0.67 (0.52, 0.88)
 Neighborhood income by place by ≥15 nodes examined 0.20 (0.05, 0.72)
Nonsignificant main effects
 Place 0.94 (0.68, 1.29)
 Neighborhood income 0.94 (0.73, 1.02)
 Waited ≥30 d after diagnosis for surgery 0.84 (0.59, 1.21)
 Waited ≥60 d after surgery for chemotherapy 0.90 (0.75, 1.06)

Note. CI = confidence interval; OR = odds ratio. Total sample from both cities was n = 1944.

a

American Joint Committee on Cancer staging.34