Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 3 Multivariate Multilevel Models for Recent Mammography by Individual and County Level Characteristics

From: Healthcare access and mammography screening in Michigan: a multilevel cross-sectional study

Characteristic Model 1: Demographics a Model 2: + Countyb
Race   
   White 0.63 (0.34-1.16) 0.64 (0.32-1.28)
   Black (Ref.) - -
Age   
   50-60 1.16 (0.71-1.91) 1.12 (0.68-1.85)
   61-74 (Ref.) - -
Income   
   < 35,000 0.33 (0.14-0.76)** 0.32 (0.14-0.74)**
   35,000-74,999 0.47 (0.21-1.05) 0.46 (0.21-1.03)
   > 75,000 (Ref.) - -
Employment   
   Unemployed 0.85 (0.46-1.56) 0.90 (0.48-1.67)
   Retired/Unable 1.15 (0.66-2.00) 1.13 (0.65-1.99)
   Employed (Ref.) - -
Education   
   Less than High School 2.19 (1.21-3.96)** 2.05 (1.12-3.75)*
   Some College 1.49 (0.85-2.60) 1.45 (0.82-2.56)
   College plus - -
Marital Status   
   Single 0.50 (0.25-1.02) 0.51 (0.25-1.03)
   Divorced/Separated 0.74 (0.43-1.27) 0.75 (0.43-1.31)
   Widowed 1.24 (0.62-2.48) 1.22 (0.60-2.44)
   Married (Ref.) - -
Usual Source of Care   
   No 0.46 (0.21-0.99)* 0.46 (0.21-1.02)
   Yes (Ref.) - -
Usual Healthcare Provider   
   No 0.32 (0.15-0.69)** 0.33 (0.15-0.71)**
   Yes (Ref.) - -
Health Insurance Status   
   No 0.27 (0.14-0.54)** 0.26 (0.13-0.52)**
   Yes (Ref.) - -
Facilities c   
   Low   1.55 (0.76-3.14)
   High (Ref.)   -
Personnel c   
   Low   1.16 (0.48-2.80)
   High (Ref.)   -
Concentrated Affluence d   
   Low   2.23 (0.89-5.56)
   High (Ref.)   -
Concentrated Disadvantage e   
   Low   1.26 (0.55-2.87)
   High (Ref.)   -
Concentrated Immigration f   
   Low   0.82 (0.32-2.14)
   High (Ref.)   -
Percent black g   
   < 6%   0.88 (0.37-2.09)
   > = 6% (Ref.)   -
  1. aModel adjusting for individual demographic variables only
  2. bModel adjusting for county level variables including healthcare access and SES in addition to individual demographic variables
  3. cPersonnel and Facilities, two measures of health care access were defined using principal components analysis on the count per 10,000 population of several variables by county: hospitals, mammography facilities, MDs, DOs and nurse practitioners
  4. dConcentrated affluence was based on PCA of county level proportion of individuals making over $100,000, proportion over 25 years with a college degree and the proportion of white collar workers
  5. eConcentrated disadvantage was based on PCA of county level proportion of persons in poverty, proportion of families with a female-headed household, proportion of households that are food stamp recipients, and proportion of unemployed
  6. fConcentrated immigration was based on PCA of the proportion of foreign born individuals and the proportion of non-English speaking individuals
  7. *P < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001; Ref, reference group