Skip to main content

Table 2 Odds ratios (95% confidence intervals) of functional decline between 2003 and 2010 according to socioeconomic position (SEP) and perceived unfairness, adjusted for health-related functioning in 2003, age, and sex

From: Perceived unfairness and socioeconomic inequalities in functional decline: the Dutch SMILE prospective cohort study

 

Physical decline between ‘03 and ‘10

Mental decline between ‘03 and ‘10

 

Model 1c

Model 2d

Model 1

Model 2

SEP

 High

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

 Intermediate

0.90 (0.61, 1.32)

0.88 (0.60, 1.30)

1.05 (0.67, 1.66)

1.03 (0.65, 1.63)

 Low

0.80 (0.53, 1.22)

0.76 (0.50, 1.16)

1.82 (1.17, 2.84)

1.76 (1.13, 2.75)

 Continuous score a

0.98 (0.80, 1.20)

0.94 (0.77, 1.15)

1.33 (1.06, 1.67)

1.30 (1.04, 1.64)

Perceived unfairness

 Low

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

 Intermediate

1.32 (0.88, 1.99)

1.33 (0.88, 2.00)

1.09 (0.70, 1.69)

1.09 (0.70, 1.70)

 High

1.75 (1.16, 2.62)

1.79 (1.19, 2.70)

1.48 (0.96, 2.28)

1.41 (0.91, 2.19)

 Continuous score b

1.57 (1.17, 2.11)

1.56 (1.16, 2.10)

1.47 (1.07, 2.03)

1.41 (1.02, 1.94)

  1. a The socioeconomic continuous score is a standardised score with mean 0 and standard deviation 1; higher scores indicate worse socioeconomic status. b The perceived unfairness continuous score ranges from 0 (low) to 4 (high). c Model 1: socioeconomic position and perceived unfairness not simultaneously adjusted. d Model 2: socioeconomic position and perceived unfairness simultaneously adjusted.