Skip to main content

Table 3 GM cotinine concentrations (GM cot (ng/ml)) and univariate analyses by different socio-demographic characteristics in Malaysian schoolchildren

From: A survey of schoolchildren's exposure to secondhand smoke in Malaysia

Socio-demographic and household characteristics

Urban (n)I

Rural (n)II

Total (n)III

 

GM cot

p-value

GM cot

p-value

GM cot

p-value

Geometric mean

0.54 (688)*

 

0.36 (376)*

t = 4.069

 

p < 0.0001

Gender T

      

Boy

0.58 (284)

t = 1.144

0.35 (164)

t = -0.454

0.48 (448)

t = 0.559

Girl

0.51 (396)

p = 0.253

0.37 (209)

p = 0.650

0.46 (605)

p = 0.576

Education of father ++a

      

Middle school

0.81 (29)

F = 3.593

0.36 (26)

F = 2.909

0.57 (159)

F = 3.328

High school

0.59 (399)*

p = 0.013

0.35 (245)

p = 0.035

0.49 (590)

p = 0.019

Diploma/Technical cert.

0.54 (81)

 

0.60 (45)*

 

0.58 (117)

 

College/University

0.38 (129)*

 

0.25 (44)*

 

0.35 (159)*

 

Occupation of father ++b

      

Manual non-skilled

0.46 (180)

F = 10.926

0.40 (156)

F = 1.948

0.45 (280)

F = 9.445

Skilled worker

0.45 (101)

p < 0.0001

0.45 (64)

p = 0.122

0.44 (149)

p < 0.0001

Armed forces

0.91 (179)*

 

0.25 (30)

 

0.77 (198)*

 

Managerial/Professional

0.41 (180)*

 

0.29 (79)

 

0.37 (242)

 

Family income ++

      

Low

0.55 (262)

F = 1.819

0.38 (209)

F = 0.140

0.46 (528)

F = 1.316

Middle

0.57 (225)

p = 0.163

0.35 (83)

p = 0.869

0.49 (327)

p = 0.269

High

0.41 (96)

 

0.36 (38)

 

0.39 (144)

 

SHS in household T

      

Non-smoking

0.38 (322)*

t = -6.23

0.22 (124)*

t = -5.323

0.32 (446)*

t = -7.329

Smoking

0.80 (278)*

p < 0.0001

0.51 (223)*

p < 0.0001

0.65 (501)*

p < 0.0001

Child's sleeping area ++c

      

Own room/share siblings

0.89 (207)

F = 1.789

0.55 (162)

F = 0.543

0.72 (369)

F = 2.724

Living room

0.60 (52)

p = 0.169

0.84 (32)

p = 0.582

0.54 (84)

p = 0.067

Share with parents/adults

0.49 (18)

 

0.79 (28)

 

0.40 (46)

 

Use of air-conditioner ++d

      

None

0.59 (462)*

F = 4.109

0.38 (295)

F = 0.807

0.51 (702)*

F = 3.804

Living room

0.35 (42)

p = 0.007

0.21 (11)

p = 0.490

0.34 (49)

p = 0.010

Child's sleeping area

0.36 (83)

 

0.28 (25)

 

0.32 (101)*

 

The use of exhaust system T

      

No

0.58 (508)*

t = 2.485

0.38 (314)

t = 1.511

0.50 (756)*

t = 2.699

Yes

0.41 (146)*

p = 0.013

0.28 (55)

p = 0.132

0.36 (184)*

p = 0.007

Smoking restriction in homes ++e

      

Total

0.51 (437)

F = 2.150

0.35 (233)*

F = 2.333

0.45 (667)*

F = 3.464

Partial

0.65 (139)

p = 0.117

0.38 (94)

p = 0.099

0.52 (230)

p = 0.032

None

0.75 (33)

 

0.71 (19)*

 

0.74 (52)*

 
  1. * Significant differences when p < 0.05
  2. ++ ANOVA test performed with LSD post-hoc test when F value have p < 0.05
  3. T t-test performed
  4. a For education of father in column I, GM between the group high school and college/university were significantly different
  5. b For occupation of father in column I, GM between the groups armed forces and Managerial/Professional were significantly different
  6. c For children who live in smoking home only
  7. d For the use of air-conditioner in column I, GM for all the groups were significantly different from None
  8. a For education of father in column II, GM between the group Diploma/Certificate were significantly different from college/university level
  9. e For smoking restriction in homes in column II, GM between total smoking restriction and no smoking restriction group were significantly different
  10. a For education of father in column III, GM for all groups were significantly different when compared to college/university level
  11. b For occupation of father in column III, GM for all groups were significantly different when compared to armed forces category
  12. c For child's sleeping area in column III , GM between own room/share with siblings and share with parents/adults were significantly different
  13. d For the use of air-conditioner in column III , GM between none and child's sleeping area were significantly different
  14. e For smoking restriction in homes in column II, GM between total smoking restriction and no smoking restriction were significantly different
Back to article page

BMC Public Health

ISSN: 1471-2458

Contact us