The role of betel-quid chewing in smoking cessation among workers in Taiwan

BMC Public Health

Table 3 Hierarchical logistic regression of failed attempt versus successful cessation

	Model 1		Model 2
	OR	95% CI	OR	95% CI
Gender
Female	(Reference)		(Reference)
Male	3.6*	2.37-5.47	3.23*	2.13-4.92
Age (yrs)	0.96*	0.94-0.97	0.96*	0.95-0.98
Education level
College above	(Reference)		(Reference)
Elementary school	0.94	0.49-1.81	0.95	0.48-1.85
High school	1.07	0.77-1.49	1.05	0.75-1.47
Occupations
Professionals	(Reference)		(Reference)
Senior officials and managers	1.34	0.75-2.42	1.27	0.7-2.3
Technicians & clerks	0.85	0.48-1.51	0.86	0.48-1.54
Salespersons & service workers	1.4	0.78-2.51	1.41	0.78-2.56
Skilled agricultural and fishery work, craft and related trades workers, and elementary occupations	1.09	0.61-1.97	0.98	0.54-1.79
Knowledge about tobacco hazards	0.92	0.8-1.04	0.92	0.81-1.05
Attitude toward smoking	0.74*	0.69-0.8	0.75*	0.7-0.8
Exposures to SHS at work
No	(Reference)		(Reference)
Yes	1.08	0.78-1.5	1.01	0.72-1.4
Exposures to SHS at home
No	(Reference)		(Reference)
Yes	2.01*	1.47-2.75	1.9*	1.38-2.62
Smoking restriction at work
No restriction	(Reference)		(Reference)
Totally prohibited	0.66	0.43-1.03	0.69	0.44-1.08
Ban in some areas	1.1	0.77-1.55	1.11	0.78-1.59
Smoking restriction at home
No restriction	(Reference)		(Reference)
Totally prohibited	0.54*	0.36-0.8	0.53*	0.36-0.8
Ban in some areas	1.86*	1.3-2.66	1.92*	1.34-2.76
Betel quid chewing
No			(Reference)
Yes			3.46*	2.17-5.51
−2log likelihood	1140.96*		1108.86*
Nagelkerke R²	0.30		0.33

ISSN: 1471-2458