Skip to main content

Table 2 Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis of Tooth-brushing Frequency with non-imputed and imputed models

From: Social determinants and behavioural factors influencing toothbrushing frequency among primary school children in rural Australian community of Lithgow, New South Wales

Socio-behavioural factors

Tooth-brushing frequency

Univariable analysis

Multivariable analysis

Unadjusted odds ratio (95% CI)

p value

Adjusted odds ratio (95% CI)

p value

Age of the child, mean (SD)

1.04

0.323

  

Gender of the child

 Female

1.00

   

 Male

0.94 (0.69, 1.28)

0.679

  

Age when tooth brushing commenced

  

NS

 

 Less than 12 months of age

1.00

   

 12 months or more

0.63 (0.32, 1.25)

0.190

  

Last visit to Dentist

  

NS

 

 Less than 12 months

1.00

   

 12 months or more

0.69 (0.48, 0.99)

0.047

  

Serves of sugar sweetened beverages per day

  

NS

 

 0

1.00

   

 1

1.55 (0.82, 2.95)

0.178

  

 2

0.91 (0.50, 1.62)

0.741

  

 3

0.56 (0.31, 1.01)

0.055

  

 4 or more

0.50 (0.28, 0.88)

0.016

  

Serves of chocolate per day

 0

1.00

 

1.00

 

 1

0.67 (0.46, 0.96)

0.031

0.60 (0.40, 0.90)

0.013

 2 or more

0.41 (0.27, 0.64)

 < 0.001

0.41 (0.25, 0.65)

 < 0.001

Marital status of parents

 Married or having partner

1.00

 

1.00

 

 Single parent

0.46 (0.32, 0.68)

 < 0.001

0.66 (0.43, 0.99)

0.044

Age of Mother

  

NS

 

 20–29 years

1.00

   

 30–39 years

1.74 (1.05, 2.89)

0.029

  

 ≥ 40 years

2.35 (1.36, 4.04)

0.002

  

Age of Father

  

NS

 

 20–29 years

1.00

   

 30–39 years

1.29 (0.55,2.98)

0.551

  

 ≥ 40 years

1.75 (0.75, 4.08)

0.194

  

Education status of mother

  

NS

 

 University

1.00

   

 Vocational degree or high school

0.56 (0.38, 0.82)

0.004

  

Education status of father

  

NS

 

 University

1.00

   

 Vocational degree or high school

0.55 (0.33, 0.93)

0.026

  

Job of mother

  

NS

 

 Managers and professionals

1.00

   

 Skilled workers

0.69 (0.44, 1.09)

0.114

  

 Pensioners and unemployed

0.36 (0.23, 0.57)

 < 0.001

  

Job of father

    

 Managers and professionals

1.00

   

 Skilled workers

1.13 (0.76, 1.68)

0.541

  

 Pensioners and employed

1.03 (0.49, 2.14)

0.939

  

Parental attitude towards fluoridation

    

 Negative or unsure

1.00

 

1.00

 

 Positive

1.83 (1.27, 2.63)

0.001

1.74 (1.17, 2.60)

0.007

Extractions due to tooth decay in Mother

    

 No extractions

1.00

 

1.00

 

 One or more

0.53 (0.39, 0.73)

 < 0.001

0.93 (0.90, 0.97)

 < 0.001

Extractions due to tooth decay in Father

  

NS

 

 No extractions

1.00

   

 One or more

0.64 (0.45, 0.92)

0.018

  

Private dental insurance

    

 No

1.00

 

1.00

 

 Yes

2.67 (1.88, 3.80)

 < 0.001

2.04 (1.40, 2.96)

 < 0.001

Income of the family

  

NS

 

 More than $100 K

1.00

   

 $40–100 K

0.95 (0.53, 1.71)

0.878

  

 Up to $40 K

0.40 (0.22, 0.72)

0.002

  
  1. Independent variables adjusted in the risk model are: Marital status of parents, Age of mother, Education status of Mother, Education status of Father, Job of Mother, Extractions due to tooth decay in Mother, Extractions due to tooth decay in Father, Attitude towards Water Fluoridation, Private dental insurance, Income of the family
  2. CI Confidence interval, NS Not significant
  3. Model 1—Original (non-imputed data)
  4. Model 2—Imputed data