Skip to main content

Table 4 Odds ratio for setting hepatitis C virus or outdoor air pollution first priority over unsafe water in the main study (n = 2,603)

From: Risk perception and priority setting for intervention among hepatitis C virus and environmental risks: a cross-sectional survey in the Cairo community

 

Unadjusted odds ratio

(95%CI)

Adjusted odds ratio

(95%CI)

 

Hepatitis C virus

Outdoor air pollution

p-value

Hepatitis C virus

Outdoor air pollution

p-value

Characteristics of household heads

   Gender, female vs. male

0.92 (0.72 to 1.19)

0.85 (0.65 to 1.11)

.48

   

   Age (yr), older (> 55) vs. younger (< 44)

0.93 (0.70 to 1.23)

0.97 (0.80 to 1.87)

.97

   

   Age (yr), median (45 to 54) vs. younger (< 44)

0.95 (0.73 to 1.23)

1.02 (0.82 to 1.28)

    

   Education, university vs. primary school

1.85 (1.26 to 2.71)

1.56 (1.16 to 2.10)

< .0001

1.91 (1.30 to 2.81)

1.57 (1.17 to 2.10)

< .0001

   Education, secondary school vs. primary school

1.51 (1.17 to 1.95)

1.04 (0.78 to 1.37)

 

1.45 (1.13 to 1.87)

1.04 (0.80 to 1.38)

 

   Private sector employee vs. Public sector employee

0.89 (0.69 to 1.16)

1.02 (0.79 to 1.33)

.69

   

   Own business vs. Public sector employee

0.70 (0.47 to 1.05)

0.86 (0.63 to 1.17)

    

   Retired/housewife vs. Public sector employee

0.83 (0.61 to 1.14)

0.88 (0.67 to 1.15)

    

   Health status (VAS), high (> 85) vs. low (<= 70)

1.33 (0.94 to 1.89)

1.01 (0.74 to 1.38)

.02

   

   Health status (VAS), median (71 to 85) vs. low (<= 70)

0.93 (0.69 to 1.24)

0.67 (0.50 yo 0.91)

    

Characteristics of households

   Number of adults, more than two vs. less

0.85 (0.69 to 1.04)

0.88 (0.74 to 1.06)

.19

   

   Number of children, at least one child vs. none

0.82 (0.64 to 1.05)

0.98 (0.82 to 1.17)

.27

   

   Monthly income (EGP), high (> 494) vs. low (< 354)

1.49 (1.04 to 2.14)

1.15 (0.83 to 1.58)

.14

   

   Monthly income (EGP), median (355 to 494) vs. low (< 354)

1.07 (0.80 to 1.42)

1.13 (0.89 to 1.42)

    

   New rental, no vs. yes

1.18 (0.85 to 1.63)

0.99 (0.72 to 1.35)

.54

   

   Bimonthly water bill (EGP), high (> 10) vs. low (< 10)

1.36 (1.01 to 1.83)

1.09 (0.86 to 1.37)

.13

   

Perception of hepatitis C virus hazard

   Diseases related to health hazard in household, yes vs. no

1.92 (1.34 to 2.74)

0.99 (0.70 to 1.41)

< .001

1.78 (1.23 to 2.58)

0.96 (0.66 to 1.38)

< .01

   Severe risk in the long term, yes vs. no

0.99 (0.66 to 1.47)

0.88 (0.65 to 1.19)

.68

   

   Severe risk in the short term, yes vs. no

2.16 (1.64 to 2.84)

1.31 (0.97 to 1.77)

< .0001

2.22 (1.69 to 2.91)

1.04 (0.76 to 1.43)

< .0001

   Uncontrollable risk, yes vs. no

0.90 (0.69 to 1.18)

0.68 (0.52 to 0.89)

.02

   

Perception of outdoor air pollution hazard

   Diseases related to health hazard in household, yes vs. no

1.43 (1.08 to 1.89)

2.02 (1.59 to 2.57)

< .0001

1.40 (1.06 to 1.84)

1.99 (1.57 to 2.54)

< .0001

   Severe risk in the long term, yes vs. no

0.83 (0.58 to 1.19)

0.97 (0.72 to 1.30)

.56

   

   Severe risk in the short term, yes vs. no

1.16 (0.89 to 1.52)

1.53 (1.15 to 2.03)

.02

0.81 (0.62 to 1.06)

1.44 (1.05 to 1.95)

< .01

   Uncontrollable risk, yes vs. no

0.58 (0.43 to 0.76)

0.50 (0.36 to 0.70)

< .0001

0.71 (0.54 to 0.95)

0.56 (0.41 to 0.77)

< .01

Perception of unsafe water hazard

   Diseases related to health hazard in household, yes vs. no

1.27 (0.89 to 1.81)

1.26 (1.00 to 1.58)

.12

   

   Severe risk in the long term, yes vs. no

1.03 (0.72 to 1.47)

1.05 (0.80 to 1.38)

.94

   

   Severe risk in the short term, yes vs. no

1.14 (0.80 to 1.64)

1.34 (1.00 to 1.77)

.13

   

   Uncontrollable risk, yes vs. no

0.71 (0.54 to 0.91)

0.66 (0.52 to 0.85)

< .01

0.79 (0.61 to 1.03)

0.78 (0.63 to 0.97)

.05

  1. Note: All generalized logistic models were adjusted for interviewer and stratified for geographic area with finite population correction included in the variance estimation.
  2. Note: We estimated multivariate odds ratios after backward stepwise selection, with P < .05 used as the cutoff for retention in the model. Standardized scores of principal components were dichotomized (Yes for score above 0, No otherwise).
  3. Abbreviations: HCV, hepatitis C virus; VAS, Visual Analogue Scale; EGP, Egyptian Pound; 95%CI, 95% confidence interval