Els of socioeconomic status and breast cancer risk aspects; Univariate analysisVariable SES II vs.SES I OR confidence interval pvalue SES III vs.SES I OR self-assurance interval pvalue SES IV vs.SES I OR self-confidence interval pvalueAge . … … .. … … . . … … . .BCTC Data Sheet Referent .Referent .Referent Marital Status . … … .Single .Referent .Referent .Referent Married Loved ones history . ……. .Yes .Referent .Referent .Referent No No.. … … .Pregnancy .. … .No.Abortion . .Breast . … … .feeding (duration) Fatty diet regime . … … .Yes .Referent .Referent .Referent No Smoking . … … .Yes .Referent .Referent .Referent No Poor socioeconomic status has regarded because the base.Substantial variables have indicated with ……..decreased by enhancing socioeconomic status.It has meant that the odds of fantastic socioeconomic PubMed ID:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21591972 status have decreased by increasing quantity in counting the pregnancies (CI.).Also, the odds of exceptional socioeconomic status has decreased by rising quantity in counting the pregnancies .In line with table , the associations among socioeconomic status and number of pregnancies, quantity of abortions and smoking were significant.To receive this clearly, the outcomes of Various Logistic Regression have stated o The odds of moderate socioeconomic status have decreased by rising a single quantity in counting the pregnancies (CI. ).o The odds of good socioeconomic status have decreased by escalating a single number in counting the pregnancies (CI.).o The odds of outstanding socioeconomic status have decreased by rising onenumber in counting the pregnancies (CI.).o The odds of excellent socioeconomic status have elevated by rising 1 quantity in counting the abortions (CI).o The odds of moderate socioeconomic status in smokers have decreased in comparison with nonsmoker folks (CI.).The odds of fantastic socioeconomic status in smokers have decreased in comparison with nonsmoker people today (Cl.).DiscussionBased around the final results of this study, the imply age of sufferers was .years and .of your patients have been younger than years.In the study of Yavari et al the mean age of patients was . that could be comparable to this investigation .The imply age of patients was .yearsIranian Journal of Cancer PreventionRelationships in between Family members Levels of Socioeconomic Status and Distribution ..Table .Multinomial Logistic Regression test lead to partnership between family members levels of socioeconomic status and breast cancer risk factors; several analysesVariable SES II vs.SES I OR self-confidence interval pvalue SES III vs.SES I OR self-confidence interval pvalue SES IV vs.SES I OR confidence interval pvalueAge . … … .. … … . . … … . .Referent .Referent .Referent Marital Status . … … .Single .Referent .Referent .Referent Married Household history . … … .Yes .Referent .Referent .Referent No No.. … … .Pregnancy .. … .No.Abortion . .Breast . … … .feeding (duration) Fatty eating plan . … … .Yes .Referent .Referent .Referent No Smoking . … … .Yes .Referent .Referent .Referent No Poor socioeconomic status has regarded because the base.Significant variables have indicated with ……..(SD) in Akbari et al.study and in Ebrahimi et al.study the imply age of individuals was .years and % of individuals have been younger than years .In accordance with the outcomes of this study in Univariate Evaluation, a significant association involving family members socioeconomic status and age at cancer diagnosis amongst individuals has detected (p value).It has meant that am.