Martin Lindström1. 1. Department of Clinical Sciences, Malmö University Hospital, Lund University, 205 02 Malmö, Sweden. martin.lindstrom@smi.mas.lu.se
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between marital status and daily smoking, adjusting for economic conditions and trust. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. METHODS: In total, 27,757 individuals aged 18-80 years answered a postal questionnaire, which represents 59% of the random sample. A logistic regression model was used to investigate the association between marital status and daily smoking, adjusting for economic (material) conditions and trust. A multivariate analysis was performed to investigate the importance of possible confounders concerning the differences in daily smoking according to marital status. RESULTS: Smoking prevalence was 14.9% among men and 18.1% among women. The odds ratios of daily smoking for middle-aged respondents, born abroad, medium/low education, problems paying bills, low trust, and unmarried and (particularly) divorced respondents were significantly higher than those for their reference groups. Low trust was significantly higher among divorced and unmarried respondents compared with married/cohabitating respondents. Adjustment for economic conditions reduced the odds ratios of daily smoking among divorced subjects; this was not seen following adjustment for trust. CONCLUSIONS: Never-married subjects and (particularly) divorced subjects showed a significantly higher prevalence of daily smoking than married/cohabitating respondents. Economic conditions have a significant effect on the association between marital status and daily smoking, but this was not seen for trust. Copyright 2010 The Royal Society for Public Health. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between marital status and daily smoking, adjusting for economic conditions and trust. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. METHODS: In total, 27,757 individuals aged 18-80 years answered a postal questionnaire, which represents 59% of the random sample. A logistic regression model was used to investigate the association between marital status and daily smoking, adjusting for economic (material) conditions and trust. A multivariate analysis was performed to investigate the importance of possible confounders concerning the differences in daily smoking according to marital status. RESULTS: Smoking prevalence was 14.9% among men and 18.1% among women. The odds ratios of daily smoking for middle-aged respondents, born abroad, medium/low education, problems paying bills, low trust, and unmarried and (particularly) divorced respondents were significantly higher than those for their reference groups. Low trust was significantly higher among divorced and unmarried respondents compared with married/cohabitating respondents. Adjustment for economic conditions reduced the odds ratios of daily smoking among divorced subjects; this was not seen following adjustment for trust. CONCLUSIONS: Never-married subjects and (particularly) divorced subjects showed a significantly higher prevalence of daily smoking than married/cohabitating respondents. Economic conditions have a significant effect on the association between marital status and daily smoking, but this was not seen for trust. Copyright 2010 The Royal Society for Public Health. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Authors: N J Doogan; M E Roberts; M E Wewers; C A Stanton; D R Keith; D E Gaalema; A N Kurti; R Redner; A Cepeda-Benito; J Y Bunn; A A Lopez; S T Higgins Journal: Prev Med Date: 2017-03-16 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Mona Schlyter; Margrét Leosdottir; Gunnar Engström; Lena André-Petersson; Patrik Tydén; Margareta Östman Journal: Int J Behav Med Date: 2016-04
Authors: Amy L Sapp; Ichiro Kawachi; Glorian Sorensen; Anthony D LaMontagne; S V Subramanian Journal: J Occup Environ Med Date: 2010-07 Impact factor: 2.162
Authors: Stephen P Kantrow; Sarah E Jolley; Eboni G Price-Haywood; Xinnan Wang; Tung-Sung Tseng; Dodie Arnold; Lisanne F Brown; Claudia Leonardi; Richard A Scribner; Edward J Trapido; Hui-Yi Lin Journal: Ann Epidemiol Date: 2018-11-24 Impact factor: 3.797
Authors: Allison N Kurti; Janice Y Bunn; Katherine Tang; Tyler Nighbor; Diann E Gaalema; Victoria Coleman-Cowger; Sulamunn R M Coleman; Stephen T Higgins Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2019-12-10 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Robert H Friis; Claire Garrido-Ortega; Alan M Safer; Che Wankie; Paula A Griego; Mohammed Forouzesh; Kirsten Trefflich; Kimthai Kuoch Journal: J Immigr Minor Health Date: 2012-04
Authors: Ayal A Aizer; Ming-Hui Chen; Ellen P McCarthy; Mallika L Mendu; Sophia Koo; Tyler J Wilhite; Powell L Graham; Toni K Choueiri; Karen E Hoffman; Neil E Martin; Jim C Hu; Paul L Nguyen Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-09-23 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Donna Parizadeh; Seyyed Saeed Moazzeni; Mitra Hasheminia; Pegah Khaloo; Mohammad Ali Mansournia; Fereidoun Azizi; Amir Abbas Momenan; Farzad Hadaegh Journal: Int J Public Health Date: 2019-10-16 Impact factor: 3.380