Skip to main content

Table 4 Multivariate logistic regression models on determinants of empowerment among patients with T2DM, age group: 27–54 years

From: Empowerment among adult patients with type 2 diabetes: age differentials in relation to person-centred primary care, community resources, social support and other life-contextual circumstances

  Model 1
OR (95% CI)
Model 2
OR (95% CI) 
Model 3
OR (95% CI) 
Model 4
OR (95% CI) 
Model 5
OR (95% CI) 
Sex:
 1. men (Ref.) 1.19 ns.
(.73–1.93)
1.19 ns.
(.72–1.96)
1.14 ns
(.69–1.88)
1.08 ns
(.64–1.83)
1.31 ns
(.75–2.27)
 2. women
Marital status
 1.single/widowed/divorced (Ref.) 1.68*
(1.04–2.74)
1.58 ns.
(.96–2.6)
1.62 ns
(.98–2.69)
1.28 ns
(.72–2.28)
1.24 ns
(.69–2.25)
 2.married/cohabiting
Professional education
 1.lower education (Ref.) 1.44 ns.
(.90–2.32)
1.43 ns
(.88–2.32)
1.63 ns
(.98–2.7)
1.73*
(1.02–2.95)
1.71 ns
(.99–2.96)
 2.higher education
Person-centred care (PACIC)   1.70***
(1.27–2.27)
1.55***
(1.14–2.11)
1.18 ns
(.82–1.69)
1.01 ns
(.69–1.49)
Continuity of care:
 Family/regular doctor
1 = no (Ref.), 2 = yes
   1.12 ns
(.65–1.94)
0.98 ns
(.55–1.73)
1.22 ns
(.67–2.23)
 Family/regular nurse
1 = no (Ref.), 2 = yes
   2.01**
(1.20–3.36)
1.98*
(1.16–3.4)
1.85*
(1.06–3.23)
Social support:
 Community     1.55*
(1.04–2.3)
1.59*
(1.06–2.39)
 Family and friends     1.43*
(1.05–1.93)
1.20 ns
(.87–1.66)
 Peers     1.17 ns
(.95–1.44)
1.15 ns
(.92–1.43)
Diabetes-related distress      .50**
(.31–.81)
Energy/vitality      1.02*
(1.00–1.03)
Nagelkerke RSquare      .29
280
n     
  1. OR odds ratio; CI confidence interval; Ref. reference group
  2. *** p ≤ .001; ** p < .01; * p < .05; ns. non-significant