Skip to main content

Table 3 Absolute and relative inequalities in cardiovascular risk factors in women (95% CIs in parentheses) by age-group

From: Persistent socioeconomic inequalities in cardiovascular risk factors in England over 1994-2008: A time-trend analysis of repeated cross-sectional data

 

Current smoking

Obesity

Diabetes

High levels of physical activity

High blood pressure (SBP ≥ 140 mmHg)

Raised cholesterol (TC ≥ 5 mmol/l)

≥ 5 portions of fruit & vegetables

16-54

       

Absolute difference

Model 1a §

       

Q1 (reference)

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Q2

3.0 (1.9,4.2)

1.8 (0.8,2.7)

-0.2 (-0.6,0.3)

0.2 (-1.9,2.3)

0.2 (-0.5,0.9)

1.9 (-0.9,4.7)

-1.7 (-3.5,0.1)

Q3

8.1 (6.9,9.3)

4.4 (3.4,5.4)

0.2 (-0.3,0.6)

-0.3 (-2.4,1.8)

1.5 (0.8,2.3)

1.7 (-1.1,4.4)

-3.9 (-5.7,-2.1)

Q4

13.8 (12.6,15.0)

6.9 (5.9,8.0)

0.2 (-0.3,0.6)

-0.8 (-2.9,1.2)

1.7 (1.0,2.5)

0.6 (-2.1,3.4)

-5.9 (-7.6,-4.1)

Q5

20.1 (18.8,21.4)

10.5 (9.4,11.5)

1.1 (0.6,1.7)

-3.5 (-5.6,-1.5)

1.6 (0.8,2.5)

3.2 (0.4,6.0)

-10.4 (-12.2,-8.7)

Model 2a

5.1 (4.8,5.4)

2.6 (2.4,2.8)

0.3 (0.1,0.4)

-0.8 (-1.2,-0.3)

0.5 (0.3,0.7)

0.5 (-0.1,1.1)

-2.5 (-2.9,-2.1)

Model 3a

p = 0.116

p = 0.611

p = 0.222

p = 0.082

p = 0.050

p = 0.249|

p = 0.991

Relative (PR)

Model 1b §§

       

Q1 (reference)

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Q2

1.15 (1.09,1.21)

1.13 (1.06,1.21)

0.85 (0.54,1.33)

1.00 (0.93,1.09)

1.02 (0.92,1.14)

1.02 (0.98,1.05)

0.94 (0.89,1.00)

Q3

1.39 (1.32,1.46)

1.32 (1.24,1.41)

1.16 (0.77,1.77)

0.99 (0.91,1.07)

1.22 (1.10,1.34)

1.02 (0.98,1.06)

0.87 (0.82,0.93)

Q4

1.67 (1.59,1.75)

1.51 (1.42,1.61)

1.16 (0.75,1.79)

0.97 (0.89,1.05)

1.24 (1.12,1.37)

1.00 (0.96,1.04)

0.81 (0.76,0.86)

Q5

1.96 (1.87,2.06)

1.77 (1.67,1.88)

2.17 (1.49,3.17)

0.87 (0.80,0.94)

1.24 (1.12,1.38)

1.05 (1.01,1.09)

0.66 (0.61,0.71)

Model 2b ††

1.19 (1.18,1.20)

1.16 (1.14,1.17)

1.23 (1.12,1.36)

0.97 (0.95,0.99)

1.06 (1.04,1.09)

1.00 (0.99,1.02)

0.91 (0.90,0.92)

Model 3b) ‡‡

p = 0.187

p = 0.029

p = 0.998

p = 0.151

p = 0.005

p = 0.542|

p = 0.231

≥ 55 years

       

Absolute difference

Model 1a §

       

Q1 (reference)

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Q2

1.8 (0.7,3.0)

3.1 (1.6,4.6)

-0.4 (-1.5,0.8)

-0.9 (-3.0,1.2)

0.6 (-1.3,2.5)

-0.5 (-2.4,1.4)

-2.3 (-4.4,-0.1)

Q3

5.4 (4.2,6.6)

4.7 (3.1,6.2)

0.0 (-1.1,1.2)

0.0 (-2.1,2.2)

1.7 (-0.3,3.7)

-1.0 (-3.0,1.0)

-6.1 (-8.3,-4.0)

Q4

9.5 (8.2,10.8)

8.0 (6.4,9.7)

2.7 (1.3,4.1)

-2.4 (-4.6,-0.3)

2.0 (-0.1,4.0)

-4.4 (-6.8,-2.1)

-9.6 (-11.9,-7.4)

Q5

17.4 (15.9,18.9)

8.9 (7.1,10.6)

4.4 (2.8,6.0)

-5.7 (-7.9,-3.5)

4.2 (2.0,6.3)

-4.7 (-7.3,-2.2)

-16.0 (-18.2,-13.8)

Model 2a

4.2 (3.9,4.5)

2.3 (1.9,2.7)

1.2 (0.8,1.5)

-1.3 (-1.7,-0.8)

1.0 (0.5,1.4)

-1.3 (-1.9,-0.8)

-3.9 (-4.4,-3.4)

Mode13a

p = 0.431

p = 0.027

p = 0.019

p = 0.025

p = 0.251

p ≤ 0.001

p = 0.534

Relative (PR)

Model 1b §§

       

Q1 (reference)

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Q2

1.15 (1.05,1.26)

1.13 (1.06,1.20)

0.92 (0.71,1.19)

0.95 (0.84,1.09)

1.01 (0.97,1.06)

1.00 (0.98,1.02)

0.94 (0.89,1.00)

Q3

1.46 (1.34,1.59)

1.20 (1.13,1.28)

1.01 (0.79,1.29)

1.01 (0.88,1.14)

1.04 (0.99,1.08)

1.00 (0.98,1.02)

0.83 (0.78,0.89)

Q4

1.81 (1.66,1.96)

1.35 (1.27,1.43)

1.57 (1.24,1.98)

0.86 (0.74,0.99)

1.04 (1.00,1.09)

0.97 (0.94,0.99)

0.74 (0.69,0.80)

Q5

2.48 (2.29,2.69)

1.39 (1.30,1.48)

1.95 (1.54,2.45)

0.66 (0.55,0.78)

1.09 (1.04,1.14)

0.97 (0.94,0.99)

0.56 (0.51,0.61)

Model 2b ††

1.27 (1.24,1.29)

1.09 (1.07,1.10)

1.22 (1.15,1.29)

0.92 (0.89,0.95)

1.02 (1.01,1.03)

0.99 (0.99,1.00)

0.88 (0.86,0.89)

Model 3b ‡‡

p = 0.088

p = 0.208

p = 0.639

p = 0.172

p = 0.064

p ≤ 0.001

p = 0.065

  1. PR: Prevalence ratio
  2. Q1 = most affluent; Q5 = most deprived
  3. § Model 1a: Percentage point (p.p) difference between IMD quintile and Q1 (adjusted for year and age). Linear regression model: year + age + Q2 + Q3 + Q4 + Q5
  4. Model 2a: p.p difference for unit increase in IMD (fitted as ordinal level variable ranging from 1 to 5). Linear regression model: year + age + IMD. p from the model served as test of linear trend (statistical significance of absolute difference in p.p when moving from one ordinal category to one immediately higher). p ≤ 0.05 if the 95% CIs do not include 0
  5. Model 3a: p shown for interaction term testing change in absolute inequality over time. Linear regression model: year + age + IMD + (year × IMD). (|IMD fitted as 4 indicator variables; otherwise fitted as ordinal)
  6. §§ Model 1b: PR between IMD quintile and Q1 (adjusted for year and age). Log-binomial regression model: year + age + Q2 + Q3 + Q4 + Q5
  7. †† Model 2b: PR for unit increase in IMD (fitted as an ordinal level variable). Log-binomial regression model: year + age + IMD. p served as test for linear trend (change in PR when moving from one ordinal category to one immediately higher). p ≤ 0.05 if the 95% CIs do not include 1
  8. ‡‡ Model 3b: p shown for interaction term testing change in relative inequality over time. Log-binomial regression model: year + age + IMD + (year × IMD). (|IMD fitted as 4 indicator variables; otherwise fitted as ordinal)
  9. ∫ Model fitted using Poisson regression due to log-binomial regression failing to converge