TABLE 4

Regression Analyses Predicting 2-Week Outcomes for Child Safety Seat Use, Smoke Alarm Use, and Poison Storage

Odds Ratio (95% Confidence Interval); P
Child Safety Seat UseSmoke Alarm UsePoison Storage
Model 1: intent-to-treat analysis
    Control group1.001.001.00
    Intervention group1.32 (1.03–1.72); .031.23 (0.85–1.78)1.11 (0.81–1.52)
Model 2: exposure analysis
    Control group1.001.001.00
    Intervention group
        Low exposure1.15 (0.85–1.54)0.95 (0.63–1.42)0.77 (0.54–1.11)
        High exposure1.70 (1.20–2.41); .0032.07 (1.16–3.69); .012.01 (1.27–3.16); .003
Model 3: exposure analysis adjusted for income
    Control group
        Lower income1.001.001.00
        Higher income1.27 (0.84–1.91)0.83 (0.46–1.46)1.36 (0.82–2.26)
    Intervention group
        Low exposure, lower income0.96 (0.66–1.39)0.72 (0.43–1.21)0.91 (0.57–1.44)
        Low exposure, higher income2.09 (1.28–3.40); .0031.27 (0.63–2.59)0.72 (0.41–1.28)
        High exposure, lower income1.08 (0.68–1.72)1.80 (0.83–3.91)2.70 (1.42–5.11); .002
        High exposure, higher income3.28 (1.94–5.54); .0001.90 (0.81–4.48)1.81 (0.94–3.45)