Skip to main content

Table 2 Associations between alcohol outlet access and usual alcohol intake on a single occasion from multinomial regression (N = 995)

From: Associations between access to alcohol outlets and alcohol intake and depressive symptoms in women from socioeconomically disadvantaged neighbourhoods in Australia

 

SHORT-TERM

HARM

LONG-TERM

HARM

Don’t drink vs. Above guidelines

Within guidelines vs. Above guidelines

Don’t drink vs. Above guidelines

Within guidelines vs. Above guidelines

Alcohol outlet exposurea

ORb (95% CI)

OR (95% CI)

OR (95% CI)

OR (95% CI)

All outlets

 Number within 0.4 km

   Zero spike

0.93 (0.53, 1.62)

0.87 (0.56, 1.35)

0.93 (0.47, 1.82)

0.90 (0.52, 1.55)

   Greater than zero c

0.98 (0.95, 1.01)

1.00 (0.97, 1.04)

0.96 (0.92, 1.00)*

0.98 (0.94, 1.02)

  Number within 3 km

0.996 (0.990, 1.002)

1.000 (0.999, 1.000)

0.995 (0.989, 1.001)

0.999 (0.998, 1.000)**

Off-site outlets

 Number within 0.4 km

   Zero spike

0.73 (0.40, 1.33)

0.67 (0.40, 1.13)

0.87 (0.42, 1.80)

0.90 (0.47, 1.75)

   Greater than zero

0.80 (0.49, 1.30)

0.70 (0.40, 1.24)

0.74 (0.41, 1.34)

0.69 (0.38, 1.26)

  Number within 3 km

0.974 (0.953, 0.997)*

1.004 (0.991, 1.016)

0.962 (0.939, 0.986)**

0.988 (0.976, 1.001)

On-site outlets

 Number within 0.4 km

   Zero spike

1.22 (0.72, 2.07)

1.08 (0.67, 1.74)

1.32 (0.74, 2.38)

1.17 (0.72, 1.91)

   Greater than zero

0.97 (0.93, 1.01)

1.00 (0.98, 1.03)

0.96 (0.91, 1.01)

0.99 (0.95, 1.02)

  Number within 3 km

0.996 (0.989, 1.002)

0.999 (0.998, 1.000)

0.995 (0.988, 1.001)

0.998 (0.997, 0.999)**

On-site (excl. late night) outlets

 Number within 0.4 km

   Zero spike

1.57 (0.70, 3.53)

1.08 (0.62, 1.88)

1.45 (0.54, 3.94)

0.96 (0.48, 1.91)

   Greater than zero

1.00 (0.92, 1.08)

1.03 (0.97, 1.09)

0.95 (0.86, 1.04)

0.96 (0.88, 1.05)

  Number within 3 km

0.993 (0.982, 1.004)

0.999 (0.997, 1.001)

0.991 (0.980, 1.002)

0.997 (0.996, 0.999)**

Late night on-site outletsd

 Number within 3 km

   Zero spike

0.993 (0.686, 1.436)

0.914 (0.658, 1.268)

1.182 (0.761, 1.836)

1.157 (0.768, 1.742)

   Greater than zero

0.991 (0.981, 1.001)

0.998 (0.996, 1.001)

0.988 (0.978, 0.998)*

0.996 (0.992, 0.999)**

  1. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001. Models adjusted for education, employment, household income and urban/rural classification
  2. aFractional polynomials identified linear relationship between continuous alcohol outlet access and alcohol intake as best fit to the data. Separate models were fitted for each of the alcohol outlet access measures (i.e., number within 0.4 km and number within 3 km)
  3. bOdds ratio and 95% confidence interval
  4. cGreater than zero is the continuous predictor for all observations greater than zero
  5. dToo few individuals had a late night on-site outlet within 0.4 km of home (n = 13). Only the number within 3 km was considered as an exposure
Back to article page

BMC Public Health

ISSN: 1471-2458

Contact us