Table 1.Basic characteristics of study population, stratified by gender
|
Parameters |
Gender
|
Total (n = 556) |
|
Female (n = 362) |
Male (n = 193) |
Age (y) |
|
37.2 (16.0) |
35.1 (14.0) |
36.5 (15.2) |
Body mass index (kg/m2) |
|
22.0 (3.1) |
23.4 (2.6) |
22.6 (2.9) |
Education |
High school degree or less |
108 (30.2) |
61 (32.6) |
169 (31.0) |
|
College/university degree |
250 (69.8) |
126 (67.4) |
376 (69.0) |
Family status |
Single |
112 (31.1) |
53 (27.9) |
165 (30.0) |
|
In a relationship |
141 (39.2) |
95 (50.0) |
236 (42.9) |
|
Parent |
107 (29.7) |
42 (22.1) |
149 (27.1) |
Skin type |
I |
9 (2.5) |
1 (0.5) |
10 (1.8) |
|
II |
98 (27.3) |
39 (20.2) |
137 (24.8) |
|
III |
202 (56.3) |
115 (59.6) |
317 (57.4) |
|
IV |
50 (13.9) |
38 (19.7) |
88 (15.9) |
Table 2.Ranking of relevance of information material on skin health by publisher and sources, stratified by gender, male (M) and female (F)
|
|
Not important |
Important |
p-value |
Rank M/F |
“From where do you get your knowledge about sun protection?” |
Sun screen producers |
M |
66 (36.1) |
117 (63.9) |
0.01*
|
1/1 |
F |
89 (25.4) |
261 (74.6) |
|
|
Health care providers |
M |
82 (42.9) |
109 (57.1) |
0.104 |
2/2 |
F |
125 (35.8) |
224 (64.2) |
|
|
Indoor tanning parlors |
M |
144 (81.8) |
32 (18.2) |
0.626 |
3/3 |
F |
259 (83.5) |
51 (16.5) |
|
|
“Which of the following sources of information about sun protection are relevant to you?” |
Print media |
M |
91 (45.0) |
111 (55.0) |
0.904 |
1/2 |
F |
170 (45.6) |
203 (54.4) |
|
|
TV |
M |
99 (49.0) |
103 (51.0) |
0.222 |
2/1 |
F |
163 (43.7) |
210 (56.3) |
|
|
Family |
M |
108 (53.5) |
94 (46.5) |
0.396 |
3/3 |
F |
200 (53.6) |
173 (46.4) |
|
|
Physician |
M |
114 (56.4) |
88 (43.6) |
0.734 |
4/4 |
F |
205 (55.0) |
168 (45.0) |
|
|
Internet |
M |
129 (63.9) |
73 (36.1) |
0.004**
|
5/6 |
F |
281 (75.3) |
92 (24.7) |
|
|
Friends |
M |
153 (75.7) |
49 (24.3) |
0.748 |
6/5 |
F |
279 (74.8) |
94 (25.2) |
|
|
Radio |
M |
164 (81.2) |
38 (18.8) |
0.826 |
7/7 |
F |
300 (80.4) |
73 (19.6) |
|
|
School |
M |
178 (88.1) |
24 (11.9) |
0.230 |
8/8 |
F |
315 (84.5) |
58 (15.5) |
|
|
Table 3.Results from multivariate analysis of variance for effects of information sources on study subjects’ knowledge, sun risk perception, and sun protection
Information sources |
Dependant variable |
df1 |
(Mean)2 1 |
df2 |
(Mean)2 2 |
F |
p-value |
Few vs. numerous |
Knowledge |
1 |
0.165 |
502 |
1.225 |
0.134 |
0.714 |
Sun risk perception |
1 |
0.174 |
502 |
0.482 |
0.361 |
0.548 |
Sun protection |
1 |
0.147 |
502 |
0.455 |
0.324 |
0.570 |
Physician vs. all |
Knowledge |
1 |
8.527 |
508 |
1.234 |
6.912 |
0.009 |
Sun risk perception |
1 |
8.272 |
508 |
0.469 |
17.638 |
0.000 |
Sun protection |
1 |
6.316 |
508 |
0.449 |
14.073 |
0.000 |
Table 4.Correlations between amount of picked sources of information and publisher of information material
Correlation coefficients |
(1) |
(2) |
(3) |
(4) |
(5) |
(6) |
(7) |
(8) |
(9) |
(10) |
Sources of information |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) Physician |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2) Family |
0.01 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3) Friends |
-0.044 |
0.198**
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4) Radio |
0.048 |
-0.014 |
0.128**
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5) School |
-0.018 |
0.159**
|
0.142**
|
0.083*
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
(6) TV |
-0.025 |
-0.009 |
0.153**
|
0.210**
|
0.128**
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
(7) Internet |
0.031 |
-0.075 |
0.090*
|
0.084*
|
0.052 |
0.146**
|
1 |
|
|
|
(8) Print media |
-0.073 |
-0.116**
|
0.054 |
0.154**
|
-0.043 |
0.138**
|
0.150**
|
1 |
|
|
Information material |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(9) Health care providers |
-0.206**
|
0.114**
|
0.119**
|
-0.058 |
0.049 |
0 |
0.029 |
-0.090*
|
1 |
|
(10) Tanning parlors |
-0.015 |
0.008 |
-0.077 |
-0.095*
|
-0.066 |
-0.092*
|
-0.029 |
0.044 |
0.069 |
1 |
(11) Sun screen producers |
-0.093*
|
-0.004 |
-0.094*
|
-0.037 |
0.001 |
-0.138**
|
-0.007 |
-0.111**
|
0.035 |
0.161**
|