Skip to main content

Table 3 Linear regression of generic mental healtha explained by ethnicity, with recovery opportunities as potential mediator

From: Do unfavourable working conditions explain mental health inequalities between ethnic groups?: cross-sectional data of the HELIUS study

Recovery opportunities Models:

1: Ethnicity + age and gender

2: Ethnicity + recovery opportunities + age and gender

Attenuation %b

Mediation testc

95 % CI (bootstrap)

 

b

95 % CI

b

95 % CI

   

Dutch (reference)

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

African Surinamese

−0.40

(−1.02 to 0.23)

−0.02

(−0.65 to 0.61)

-

−0.41

(−0.54 to −0.30)

South-Asian Surinamese

−2.33

(−2.98 to −1.66)

−2.10

(−2.7 to −1.41)

−10 %

−0.32

(−0.44 to −0.22)

Turkish

−4.25

(−4.93 to −3.58)

−3.61

(−4.3 to −2.93)

−15 %

−0.63

(−0.80 to −0.48)

Ghanaian

−1.35

(−2.10 to −0.60)

−0.67

(−1.43 to 0.09)

−50 %

−0.74

(−0.93 to −0.57)

Moroccan

−2.81

(−3.58 to −2.04)

−2.35

(−3.12 to −1.57)

−16 %

−0.44

(−0.58 to −0.31)

  1. aScores in generic mental health range from 11 to 70, higher scores reflect better generic health
  2. b% Change in B calculated as (Bethnicity+workcondition-Bethnicity)/(Bethnicity); only for models where the ethnic group showed a statistically significant higher risk of mental health problems and the mediation test for that ethnic group was statistically significant. Negative signs (−) are used for changes towards non-significance (zero B)
  3. cBold printed figures represent statistically significant mediation for that ethnic group