Predictors of dental visits among primary school children in the rural Australian community of Lithgow

Table 2 Multiple logistic regression of individual and combined^a parental characteristics with 6-monthly and twelve-monthly dental visits

Variables	Model 1 (N = 585)	Model 2 (N = 590)	Model 3 (N = 585)	Model 4 (N = 589)
	Adjusted OR with 95% CI^b	Adjusted OR with 95% CI^b	Adjusted OR with 95% CI^b	Adjusted OR with 95% CI^b
Age of the subject	0.92 (0.85, 0.99)*	0.92 (0.85, 0.99)*	0.87 (0.79, 0.96)*	0.88 (0.80, 0.97)*
Decayed, missing and filled teeth Status	NS²	NS²
No dmft/DMFT score			1.00	1.00
One or more dmft/DMFT score			0.64 (0.43, 0.94)*	0.62 (0.42, 0.92)*
Serves of chocolate per day	1.27 (1.05, 1.54)*	1.27 (1.05, 1.54)*	NS²	NS²
Education level of the Mother	NS²	NS²		NS²
University or College			1.00
High school or vocational training			2.28 (1.34, 3.91)*
Highest employment in the household	NS²	NS²	NS²
Managers and professionals				1.00
Skilled workers				1.47 (0.69, 3.15)*
Pensioners and unemployed				2.64 (1.21, 5.75)*
Private health insurance coverage
Yes	1.00	1.00	1.00	1.00
No	0.43 (0.30, 0.60)*	0.43 (0.30, 0.60)*	0.54 (0.35, 0.83)*	0.62 (0.39, 0.97)*

Model 1 - Original data with outcome variable as 6-month visit and individual parental characteristics
Model 2 – Original data with outcome variable as 6-month visit and combined parental characteristics
Model 3 – Original data with outcome variable as yearly visit and individual parental characteristics
Model 4 - Original data with outcome variable as yearly visit and combined parental characteristics
^aCombined parental traits indicate the highest of either parents’ factors such as education, employment and extraction history
OR Odds ratio
^bConfidence interval
*Statistically significant (p-value < 0.05)
NS² Non-significant (p-value > 0.05)

ISSN: 1472-6963