Skip to main content

Table 4 Multivariable logistic regression analyses a for point prevalence abstinence and 6-month continuous abstinence

From: Effectiveness of proactive and reactive services at the Swedish National Tobacco Quitline in a randomized trial

Predictive model (variables at baseline related to being smoke-free at follow-up)

 

Point prevalence abstinenceb

6-month continuous abstinencec

Variable

OR (95% CI)

p-value

OR (95% CI)

p-value

Service, proactive vs. reactive (ref.)

0.7 (0.5-1.1)

.149

0.8 (0.5-1.3)

.423

Gender, men vs. women (ref.)

0.6 (0.4-1.0)

.061

0.7 (0.4-1.2)

.181

Age

    

≤ 34 (ref.)

1.0

.846f

1.0

.748f

35-49

1.2 (0.7-2.1)

.578

1.3 (0.7-2.6)

.374

50-64

1.2 (0.7-2.1)

.552

1.2 (0.6-2.2)

.584

≥ 65

0.9 (0.5-1.9)

.884

1.0 (0.4-2.1)

.927

Smoked in the week before baseline, no vs. yes (ref.)

3.2 (2.1-4.9)

<.001

3.7 (2.3-5.9)

< .001

Handle stress and depression without smoking (baseline assessment, 1–10)

1.1 (1.04-1.2)

.003

1.2 (1.1-1.3)

< .001

Descriptive model (all variables related to being smoke-free at follow-up)

 

Point prevalence abstinence d

6-month continuous abstinence e

Variable

OR (95% CI)

p -value

OR (95% CI)

p -value

Service, proactive vs. reactive (ref.)

0.7 (0.5-1.1)

.163

0.7 (0.4-1.4)

.386

Gender, men vs. women (ref.)

0.6 (0.3-0.99)

.046

0.6 (0.3-1.1)

.111

Age

    

≤ 34 (ref.)

1.0

.896f

1.0

.363f

35-49

1.1 (0.6-2.1)

.674

0.9 (0.4-2.2)

.896

50-64

1.1 (0.6-1.9)

.741

0.8 (0.4-1.8)

.612

≥ 65

0.9 (0.4-1.8)

.770

0.4 (0.1-1.2)

.111

Smoked in the week before baseline,

3.1 (2.0-4.9)

<.001

5.4 (3.0-9.7)

< .001

No vs. yes (ref.)

Handle stress and depression without smoking (baseline assessment, 1–10)

1.1 (1.02-1.2)

.014

---

---

Probability of being smoke-free in 1 year (baseline assessment, 1–10)

---

---

1.3 (1.1-1.6)

< .001

Level of client satisfaction at first contact,

2.2 (1.2-4.0)

.013

---

---

High vs. other (ref.)

NRT use in the week before 12-month follow-up, yes vs. no (ref.)

---

---

0.2 (0.1-0.5)

< .001

  1. aPerformed with service, gender and age forced into both models.
  2. bN = 555, Nagelkerke R-Square 15.7%. Hosmer and Lemeshow test of goodness of fit, p = .057.
  3. cN = 555, Nagelkerke R-Square 19.2%. Hosmer and Lemeshow test of goodness of fit, p = .265.
  4. dN = 536, Nagelkerke R-Square 17.0%. Hosmer and Lemeshow test of goodness of fit, p = .365.
  5. eN = 310, Nagelkerke R-Square 33.9%. Hosmer and Lemeshow test of goodness of fit, p = .621.
  6. fp-value for the total effect of the variable with 3 df.
Back to article page

Tobacco Induced Diseases

ISSN: 1617-9625

Contact us