The influence of neighbourhood formality status and socio-economic position on self-rated health among adult men and women: a multilevel, cross sectional, population study from Aleppo, Syria

Ahmad, Balsam; Ryan, Vicky; Maziak, Wasim; Pless-Mulloli, Tanja; White, Martin

doi:10.1186/1471-2458-13-233

Table 4 Odd ratios (95% CIs) and measures of residual neighbourhood variance for the final multilevel binary logistic regression models (adjusted for age, BMI, smoking status, and level of physical exercise)

From: The influence of neighbourhood formality status and socio-economic position on self-rated health among adult men and women: a multilevel, cross sectional, population study from Aleppo, Syria

	Males		Females
	Poor Versus excellent	Normal versus excellent	Poor versus excellent	Normal versus excellent
	(n=647)	(n=864)	(n=666)	(n=988)
	OR (95% CI)	OR (95% CI)	OR (95% CI)	OR (95% CI)
Fixed effects
*Individual level*
Marital status
Ever married	1.0	1.0	1.0	1.0
Never married	3.2 (1.2, 8.9)	1.2 (0.7, 1.9)	0.2 (0.1, 0.5)	0.6 (0.4, 0.9)
Social support
Has someone to share happiness and sorrow	1.0	1.0	1.0	1.0
No	1.9 (0.7, 6.0)	0.9 (0.5, 1.6)	0.3 (0.2, 0.7)	0.8 (0.5, 1.3)
Yes
Has someone to support and help	1.0	1.0	1.0	1.0
No	0.4 (0.2, 0.9)	1.0 (0.7, 1.5)	0.8 (0.4, 1.5)	1.2 (0.8, 1.9)
Yes
Perception of neighbourhood
Suffered outdoor noise
a lot	1.0	1.0	1.0	1.0
Somewhat	0.4 (0.2, 0.9)	0.6 (0.4, 0.9)	0.9 (0.5, 1.5)	0.9 (0.6, 1.2)
Not at all	0.2 (0.1, 0.6)	0.4 (0.3, 0.7)	0.5 (0.3, 1.0)	0.7 (0.4, 1.0)
Suffered outdoor air pollution
a lot	1.0	1.0	1.0	1.0
Somewhat	0.5 (0.2, 1.1)	0.9 (0.6, 1.3)	0.6 (0.3, 1.0)	0.9 (0.6, 1.2)
Not at all	0.4 (0.2, 1.1)	0.7 (0.4, 1.1)	0.6 (0.3, 1.1)	0.8 (0.5, 1.2)
Individual SES ¹
Item ownership (for an	0.9 (0.7, 1.3)	1.0 (0.9, 1.2)	0.7 (0.6, 0.9)	0.9 (0.8, 1.0)
increase of 1 item)
*Neighbourhood level*
Formality
Live in the formal zone	1.0	1.0	1.0	1.0
Live in the informal zone	1.4 (0.3, 5.4)	0.6 (0.3, 1.2)	0.4 (0.2, 0.8)	0.5 (0.3, 0.9)
Neighbourhood SES ¹
Neighbourhood average item ownership (for an increase of one item on average)	0.8 (0.3, 2.0)	0.8 (0.5,1.3)	0.4 (0.2, 0.8)	0.6 (0.4, 0.9)
Random effects
Variance between neighbourhoods (95% CI)	0.61(0.01, 1.96)	0.17 (0.02, 0.44)	0.08 (0.00, 0.38)	0.20 (0.03, 0.49)
ICC	0.16	0.05	0.02	0.06
MOR (95% CI)	2.10 (1.11 –3.78)	1.48 (1.14 – 1.88)	1.32 (1.00 –1.79)	1.53 (1.18 – 1.95)

⁽¹⁾ All five individual SES variables were considered one at a time and simultaneously both at the individual level and the neighbourhood level. In the final model for females, only item ownership remained statistically significant when more than one SES variable was included. For males, none were statistically significant in the multivariable model, but item ownership has been included for comparison.

Back to article page

ISSN: 1471-2458

Contact us

Submission enquiries: bmcpublichealth@biomedcentral.com
General enquiries: ORSupport@springernature.com

BMC Public Health

Contact us