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.