Table. 4 Results of logistic regression models predicting awareness of alcohol warning labels
From: Do consumers ‘Get the facts’? A survey of alcohol warning label recognition in Australia
It is safest not to drink while pregnanta | Is your drinking harming yourself or others? | Kids and alcohol don’t mix | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
OR (95 % CI) | p | OR (95 % CI) | p | OR (95 % CI) | p | |
Gender | ||||||
Male | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |||
Female | 1.22 (0.78–1.90) | .391 | 0.77 (0.44–1.34) | .350 | 0.58 (0.29–1.16) | .125 |
Age | Wald χ2 p < .001 | Wald χ2 p = .026 | Wald χ2 p = .004 | |||
18–24 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |||
25–34 | 0.97 (0.56–1.64) | .873 | 0.56 (0.29–1.11) | .096 | 0.40 (0.19–0.84) | .016 |
35–45 | 0.31 (0.18–0.54) | <.001 | 0.41 (0.21–0.78) | .007 | 0.29 (0.14–0.60) | .001 |
Education | ||||||
Less than tertiary | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |||
Tertiary or above | 0.95 (0.62–1.46) | .818 | 1.57 (0.92–2.68) | .095 | 1.97 (1.02–3.84) | .045 |
Binge drinking | 1.40 (1.13–1.72) | .002 | 1.55 (1.20–2.00) | .001 | 1.54 (1.15–2.05) | .004 |
Main alcoholic drink | Wald χ2 p = .204 | Wald χ2 p = .250 | Wald χ2 p = .069 | |||
Beer | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |||
Wine | 1.23 (0.70–2.16) | .472 | 1.72 (0.89–3.31) | .108 | 2.51 (1.04–6.06) | .041 |
Spirits | 0.88 (0.48–1.61) | .671 | 1.36 (0.65–2.85) | .418 | 1.16 (0.42–3.20) | .776 |
Pre-mix | 0.48 (0.24–0.98) | .045 | 0.63 (0.25–1.59) | .325 | 0.81 (0.25–2.67) | .740 |
Cider | 0.82 (0.28–2.39) | .718 | 1.41 (0.34–5.85) | .640 | 1.38 (0.23–8.20) | .725 |
Other | 0.95 (0.30–2.97) | .929 | 1.19 (0.31–4.56) | .796 | 4.22 (1.22–14.68) | .023 |
Drink directly from can or bottle | ||||||
Never/not often | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |||
At least sometimes | 1.75 (1.10–2.77) | .018 | 2.24 (1.21–4.13) | .010 | 2.90 (0.93–3.88) | .077 |
Support for health warning labels | ||||||
Neutral or opposed | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |||
Support/strongly support | 2.48 (1.41–4.37) | .002 | 2.53 (1.25–5.12) | .010 | 2.65 (1.06–6.60) | .037 |