Skip to main content

Table 2 Odds ratios (and 95% confidence intervals) for poor and neither good nor poor self-rated health

From: Can financial insecurity and condescending treatment explain the higher prevalence of poor self-rated health in women than in men? A population-based cross-sectional study in Sweden

  

Model 1

Model 2

Model 3

Model 4

Model 5

  

(bivariate)

 

(2 + financial insecurity)

(2 + condescending treatment)

(2+ financial insecurity and condescending treatment)

Poor self-rated health

Gender

Men

1

1

1

1

1

 

Women

1.25 (1.15, 1.37)

1.29 (1.17,1.42)

1.18 (1.07, 1.30)

1.17 (1.06, 1.30)

1.08 (0.98, 1.20)

Financial insecurity

No

1

 

1

 

1

 

Yes

3.34 (3.05, 3.65)

 

3.01 (2.71, 3.35)

 

2.80 (2.51, 3.12)

Condescending treatment during the last 3 months

Never

1

  

1

1

 

Once or twice

2.01 (1.82, 2.22)

  

2.23 (1.98, 2.51)

2.09 (1.86, 2.36)

 

Several times

6.40 (5.44, 7.52)

  

5.71 (4.67, 6.97)

4.85 (3.95, 5.95)

Neither good nor poor self-rated health

Gender

Men

1

1

1

1

1

 

Women

0.98 (0.93, 1.03)

1.05 (0.99,1.12)

1.00 (0.94, 1.06)

0.99 (0.93, 1.05)

0.94 (0.88, 1.00)

Financial insecurity

No

1

 

1

 

1

 

Yes

1.91 (1.80, 2.03)

 

1.91 (1.77, 2.05)

 

1.84 (1.71, 1.98)

Condescending treatment during the last 3 months

Never

1

  

1

1

 

Once or twice

1.37 (1.29, 1.47)

  

1.74 (1.61, 1.87)

1.69 (1.56, 1.82)

 

Several times

2.19 (1.89, 2.53)

  

2.47 (2.10, 2.92)

2.29 (1.93, 2.71)

  1. Models 2-5 are adjusted for age group, educational level and longstanding illness.