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