Skip to main content

Table 5 Cox PH of race/ethnicity vs. all-cause mortality: further adjustment for health-related factors: full model a, NHANES III

From: Racial disparities in adult all-cause and cause-specific mortality among us adults: mediating and moderating factors

 

Model 8: Model 7 further adjusted for health-related factors: Full modelb

 

Loge(HR)

95 % CI

P

<50y, women, PIR ≥ 125 %

(N = 3019)

  

 NHB vs. NHW

−0.46

(-1.08;+0.15)

0.14

 MA vs. NHW

−1.17

(-2.06;-0.29)

0.009

<50y, men, PIR ≥ 125 %

(N = 2,773)

  

 NHB vs. NHW

+0.73

(+0.25;+1.22)

0.003

 MA vs. NHW

+0.05

(-0.62;+0.72)

0.88

<50y, women, PIR < 125 %

(N = 1,683)

  

 NHB vs. NHW

+0.33

(-0.63;+1.29)

0.50

 MA vs. NHW

−0.47

(-1.95;+0.99)

0.52

<50y, men, PIR < 125 %

(N = 1,232)

  

 NHB vs. NHW

+0.15

(-0.53;+0.84)

0.66

 MA vs. NHW

−0.46

(-1.30;+0.38)

0.29

≥50y, women, PIR ≥ 125 %

(N = 2,345)

  

 NHB vs. NHW

+0.11

(-0.13;+0.36)

0.36

 MA vs. NHW

−0.46

(-0.85;-0.06)

0.024

≥50y, men, PIR ≥ 125 %

(N = 2,339)

  

 NHB vs. NHW

+0.12

(-0.11;+0.34)

0.30

 MA vs. NHW

+0.03

(-0.26;+0.32)

0.84

≥50y, women, PIR < 125 %

(N = 1,046)

  

 NHB vs. NHW

−0.14

(-0.44;+0.16)

0.35

 MA vs. NHW

−0.18

(-0.64;+0.27)

0.43

≥50y, men, PIR < 125 %

(N = 805)

  

 NHB vs. NHW

+0.05

(-0.28;0.38)

0.75

 MA vs. NHW

−0.33

(-0.81;+0.15)

0.18

  1. Abbreviation: CI Confidence Interval, exp exponent, HR Hazard Ratio, LCL Lower confidence limit, Log e Natural logarithm, MA Mexican-American, NHANES National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys, NHB Non-Hispanic Black, NHW Non-Hispanic White, PIR Poverty Income Ratio, SE Standard error, UCL Upper confidence limit
  2. aValues are the natural log of hazard ratios (HR) and 95 % CI with p-values, taking into account unequal probability of selection or sampling weights. Statistical significance is inferred from a 95 % CI not crossing the value of zero
  3. bModel 8 was Model 7 (Table 4) further adjusted for 3 health-related factors (co-morbidity, allostatic load and self-rated health). Note that the point estimate of the HR can be computed as exp(β) where β = Loge(HR). The 95 % CI for the HR is computed as exp(β±1.96*SE(β)), whereby SE(β) = (UCLβ -LCLβ)/3.92