Do changes in social and economic factors lead to changes in drinking behavior in young adults? Findings from three waves of a population based panel study

Table 3 Fixed effects linear regression model of living arrangement, education/employment, income, and deprivation as exposure variables and average weekly units of alcohol consumption as outcome variable

Model	1: Crude Models^b		2: Full model^c
Variable	β	95% CI	β	95% CI
Living arrangement
Other multiperson household	0.61	-0.72,1.93	0.35	-1.00,1.69
One person household	2.51	1.23,3.79	2.32	1.02,3.63
Couple only or with others	-1.23	-2.36,-0.10	-1.37	-2.52,-0.21
Family household (in parent role)	-3.56	-5.13,-1.99	-3.84	-5.44,-2.23
Family household (in child role) (ref.)	0		0
p-value ^a		< 0.0001		< 0.0001
Education/Employment
Not in education - employed	0.21	-0.89,1.31	-0.11	-1.36,1.14
Not in education – not employed (NEET)	0.30	-1.10,1.70	0.32	-1.10,1.74
In education - employed	0.16	-0.95,1.28	-0.02	-1.25,1.20
In education -not employed (ref.)	0
p-value ^a		0.9772		0.9303
Increase in log personal income	0.36	-0.02,0.74	0.18	-0.27,0.62
p-value ^a		0.0647		0.4352
One decile increase in area deprivation	0.01	-0.14,0.16	0.02	-0.14,0.18
p-value ^a		0.9356		0.7747
One unit increase in individual deprivation	0.50	0.14,0.86	0.48	0.10,0.86
p-value ^a		0.0069		0.0132

^aType III Wald tests, which for multichotomous categorical variables (e.g. labour force status) provides a statistical test of the whole construct (not just one non-referent compared to referent comparison).
^bThe crude models include each of the independent variables individually.
^aThe full model includes all independent variables.

ISSN: 1471-2458