Skip to main content

Table 3 “Two-way interaction” parameter estimates comparing the trends in health between 1990s and 2000s, “three-way interaction” parameter estimates comparing the trends in health inequalities between 1990s and 2000s, and “four-way interaction” parameter estimates comparing the “three-way interaction” parameter estimates between countries

From: Did the English strategy reduce inequalities in health? A difference-in-difference analysis comparing England with three other European countries

  Odds ratios (logistic)
  Less-than-good self-assessed health Long-standing health problems Smoker Obesity
1. Two-way interaction parameter estimatesa
 England (low-edu) 0.76*** 0.78*** 0.82** 0.97
(0.064) (0.065) (0.073) (0.097)
2. Three-way interaction parameter estimatesb
 England 1.22 0.95 1.19 1.25
(0.197) (0.125) (0.182) (0.213)
 Finland 0.78 1.28 1.90*
(0.173) (0.308) (0.652)
 The Netherlands 1.18 1.16 1.00
(0.221) (0.181) (0.165)
 Italy 0.97 0.76*
(0.072) (0.121)
3. Four-way interaction parameter estimatesc
 England vs Finland 1.57 0.93 0.66
(0.433) (0.267) (0.253)
 England vs the Netherlands 1.04 0.82 1.20
(0.257) (0.167) (0.270)
 England vs Italy 1.23 1.64**
(0.209) (0.383)
  1. Robust standard errors in parentheses. *** p < 0.01, ** p < 0.05, * p < 0.1
  2. aBased on the “two-way interaction” analysis for low-educated people in England. An odds ratio below 1.00 indicates a larger health improvement in the period 2000–2010 than in the period 1990–2000
  3. bBased on the “three-way interaction” analysis within each country. An odds ratio below 1.00 indicates a more favourable trend in health inequalities in the period 2000–2010 than in the period 1990–2000
  4. cBased on the “four-way interaction” analysis for England and each of the comparison countries. An odds ratio below 1.0 indicates a more favourable change (between 1990–2000 and 2000–2010) in the trend in health inequalities in England as compared to the other country