Skip to main content

Table 3 Hierarchical regression analyses of the effect of male index persons’ alcohol consumption and CAGE items on female spouses’ mental distress

From: Alcohol use and spousal mental distress in a population sample: the nord-trøndelag health study

  

Scaling of variable

Ba

95% CI (B)

betaa

p

adj. R 2

p for R 2changed

Model 1:

      

.015

.000

Age spouse

Years

.006

.004, . 008

.065

.001

  

Education

1 – 4b

-.034

-.051, -.018

-.043

.001

 

Education spouse

1 – 4 b

-.045

-.062, -.027

-.056

.001

  

Model 2:

      

.015

.169

Age spouse

Years

.006

.004, .008

.066

.001

  

Education

1 – 4 b

-.033

-.050, -.017

-.042

.001

Education spouse

1 – 4 b

-.045

-.062, -.027

-.056

.001

 

Alcohol consumption

1 – 3 c

-.043

-.105, .018

-.013

.169

  

Model 3:

      

.017

<.000e

Age spouse

Years

.007

.005, .008

.070

.001

  
 

Education

1 – 4 b

-.033

-.050, -.017

-.042

.001

Education spouse

1 – 4 b

-.046

-.063, -.028

-.057

.001

Cut down

0, 1

-.009

-.080, .061

-.003

.793

Criticized

0, 1

.065

-.005, .135

.020

.070

Felt bad or guilty

0, 1

.045

.036, .154

.034

.002

 

Eye-opener

0, 1

.084

-.039, .206

.013

.182

  

Model 4:

      

.017

<.000

Age spouse

Years

.007

.005, .008

.071

.001

  

Education

1 – 4 b

-.032

-.048, -.015

-.040

.001

Education spouse

1 – 4 b

-.045

-.063, -.028

-.057

.001

Alcohol consumption

1 – 3 c

-.069

-.132, .006

-.020

.032

Cut down

0, 1

.002

-.069, .074

.001

.949

Criticized

0, 1

.068

-.002, .139

.021

.056

Felt bad or guilty

0, 1

.095

.036, .154

.034

.002

 

Eye-opener

0, 1

.086

-.037, .209

.013

.169

  

Model 5:

      

.084

<.000

Age spouse

Years

.006

.005, .008

.068

.001

  

Education

1 – 4 b

-.021

-.037, -.005

-.026

.012

Education spouse

1 – 4 b

-.042

-.058, -.025

-.052

.001

Alcohol consumption

1 – 3 c

-.085

-.149, .-021

-.025

.010

Cut down

0, 1

-.076

-.145, -.007

-.023

.032

Criticized

0, 1

.034

-.034, .102

.010

.325

Felt bad or guilty

0, 1

.002

-.056, .059

.001

.951

Eye-opener

0, 1

.018

-.100, .137

.003

.763

Mental distress

standardized

.250

.231, .270

.228

.001

Alcohol consumption spouse

1 – 3 b

-.011

-.069, .047

-.004

.710

Cut down spouse

0, 1

.347

.215, .478

.054

.001

Criticized spouse

0, 1

.296

.124, .467

.033

.001

Felt bad or guilty spouse

0, 1

.327

.236, .418

.071

.001

 

Eye-opener spouse

0, 1

.389

.123, .655

.027

.004

  
 

N=11,584 couples

       
  1. a B= unstandardized regression coefficient, beta=standardized regression coefficient.
  2. b 1= primary school, 4 = ≥years at university/college.
  3. c 1= low/moderate, lower 95%, 2 = high, 95-98%, 3= very high, top 2%.
  4. d P-value of the F-test of the R2 change compared to former model.
  5. e Compared to model 1.
  6. Spouses’ own responses.
Back to article page

BMC Public Health

ISSN: 1471-2458

Contact us