# Table 5 Step-wise logistic regression: Final (Step 2) models showing the multivariate predictors of bowel screening behaviours

Ā

Decision to delay seeking medical help

Ever provided

a faecal sample

Invasive bowel screening

test in past 5Ā years

Variable

Odds Ratio (95% CI)

p value

Odds Ratio (95% CI)

p value

Odds Ratio (95% CI)

p value

Sex1

1.22 (0.62ā2.39)

.560

1.80 (0.98ā3.31)

.059

1.84 (0.85ā3.97)

.123

Age

1.00 (0.97ā1.04)

.843

1.05 (1.02ā1.08)

.002

1.06 (1.02ā1.10)

.002

Perceived low colorectal cancer risk2

1.31 (0.68ā2.54)

.418

0.51 (0.27ā0.96)

.038

0.52 (0.22ā1.22)

.133

Perceived high colorectal cancer risk3

1.06 (0.43ā2.62)

.906

0.51 (0.23ā1.16)

.107

1.76 (0.71ā4.36)

.225

Discussed with doctor4

0.47 (0.24ā0.95)

.035

2.16 (1.21ā3.85)

.009

6.79 (3.57ā12.94)

.000

Colorectal cancer screening knowledge

1.19 (1.00ā1.42)

.046

0.99 (0.85ā1.15)

.868

1.14 (0.93ā1.38)

.206

EBBS fear of outcome

1.53 (1.10ā2.13)

.012

0.89 (0.64ā1.24)

.484

0.92 (0.60ā1.42)

.718

EBBS embarrassment

1.49 (0.97ā2.29)

.070

1.73 (1.10ā2.70)

.017

1.60 (0.92ā2.77)

.097

EBBS insertion disgust

0.91 (0.57ā1.46)

.698

0.66 (0.42ā1.04)

.070

0.41 (0.22ā0.76)

.004

EBBS faecal disgust

1.47 (0.88ā2.45)

.142

0.75 (0.46ā1.24)

.265

1.12 (0.58ā2.17)

.734

1. 1 0ā=āfemale (nā=ā233), 1ā=āmale (nā=ā72); 2 0ā=ānot perceived low CRC risk (nā=ā236), 1ā=āperceived low CRC risk low risk (nā=ā69); 3 0ā=ānot perceived high CRC risk (nā=ā266), 1ā=āperceived high CRC risk (nā=ā39); 4 0ā=ānever discussed CRC risk with doctor (nā=ā207), 1ā=āhad discussed CRC risk with doctor (nā=ā98)