Skip to main content

Table 2 Bivariate and multivariable analyses of factors associated with motivation to quit vs. not*

From: Association between textual and pictorial warnings on tumbac (waterpipe tobacco) boxes and motivation to quit waterpipe smoking among Lebanese and Iraqi adolescents

 

Unadjusted model (OR)

p

Adjusted model (aOR)

p

Warning efficacious to stop smoking

 

0.001

 

0.030

 Not at all

1

 

1

 

 A little

2.40

0.002

1.91

0.055

 Moderately

2.66

0.017

2.83

0.045

 Very

5.21

0.038

6.64

0.037

Been affected by warnings on tumbac boxes

    

 No

1

 

1

 

 Yes

2.62

0.001

1.30

0.508

Importance of health warnings on tumbac boxes

 

0.186

 

0.018

 Not at all

1

 

1

 

 A little

1.65

0.266

1.14

0.805

 Moderately

1.06

0.901

0.34

0.053

 Very

184

0.168

0.60

0.348

Warnings increased curiosity for information about how to stop waterpipe smoking

 

< 0.001

 

0.013

 Not at all

1

 

1

 

 A little

3.23

< 0.001

2.59

0.009

 Moderately

3.14

0.001

3.34

0.008

 Very

5.08

< 0.001

3.58

0.011

Pictorial warnings are more effective than textual ones in your opinion

    

 No

1

 

1

 

 Yes

2.04

0.008

0.96

0.920

Consider changing tumbac brand if company uses pictorial warnings

    

 No

1

 

1

 

 Yes

2.77

< 0.001

2.15

0.029

Choice of warnings

 

0.058

 

0.786

 Textual only

1

 

1

 

 Pictorial only

1.09

0.858

0.76

0.507

 Textual and pictorial

1.95

0.035

1.04

0.937

  1. *Reference group; OR = unadjusted odds ratio; aOR = adjusted odds ratio. The adjusted model is considered in terms of the following confounders: country, age, gender, smoking inside the house, psychological distress, waterpipe harm perception, knowledge about waterpipe, attitude towards waterpipe, cigarette dependence and waterpipe dependence and the other variables related to pictorial warnings. Numbers in bold indicate significant p values