Skip to main content

Table 3 Logistic regression analysis of outpatient care utilization

From: The effects of smoking, regular drinking, and unhealthy weight on health care utilization in China

  Pooled logistic Random effects logistic Fixed effects logistic
(i) (ii) (iii)
Odds Ratios (95% CI) Odds Ratios (95% CI) Odds Ratios (95% CI)
Smoking status
 Current smoker 1.12 (1.03–1.21) 1.16 (1.06–1.27) 1.88 (1.42–2.51)
 Former smoker 1.12 (1.01–1.24) 1.20 (1.07–1.33) 2.03 (1.51–2.74)
 Never smoker (ref.) 1.00 1.00 1.00
 Regular drinking 0.82 (0.76–0.88) 0.80 (0.74–0.87) 0.83 (0.75–0.93)
BMI groups
 Healthy weight (ref.) 1.00 1.00 1.00
 Underweight 1.11 (1.02–1.21) 1.13 (1.03–1.25) 1.09 (0.96–1.24)
 Overweight 0.96 (0.91–1.01) 0.96 (0.91–1.02) 1.02 (0.93–1.10)
 Obese 0.99 (0.91–1.08) 1.03 (0.94–1.13) 1.26 (1.08–1.46)
Age group
 16–24 (ref.) 1.00 1.00 1.00
 25–64 1.55 (1.32–1.83) 1.58 (1.32–1.89) 1.17 (0.91–1.50)
  > =65 1.98 (1.67–2.35) 2.20(1.83–2.66) 1.69 (1.28–2.23)
Male 0.71 (0.66–0.77) 0.65 (0.60–0.71)
Educational attainment
 Illiteracy (ref.) 1.00 1.00 1.00
 Elementary school 0.88 (0.82–0.94) 0.85 (0.79–0.92) 0.98 (0.82–1.17)
 Middle school 0.85 (0.80–0.91) 0.82 (0.76–0.88) 1.04 (0.81–1.33)
 High school 0.79 (0.72–0.87) 0.75 (0.68–0.82) 1.16 (0.81–1.65)
 Above high school 0.76 (0.68–0.86) 0.70 (0.62–0.80) 1.20 (0.77–1.87)
Married 0.96 (0.89–1.04) 0.95 (0.86–1.04) 0.82 (0.69–0.98)
Urban residency 0.90 (0.86–0.95) 0.91 (0.86–0.97) 1.26 (1.09–1.45)
Medical insurance coverage 1.18 (1.09–1.28) 1.19 (1.09–1.30) 1.12 (1.01–1.23)
Household income 1.00 (0.99–1.00) 1.00 (1.00–1.01) 1.01 (1.00–1.02)
Employed 1.14 (1.08–1.21) 1.18 (1.11–1.25) 1.23 (1.13–1.33)
Health status
 Poor 3.07 (2.89–3.26) 3.44 (3.21–3.68) 2.49 (2.30–2.69)
 Fair (ref.) 1.00 1.00 1.00
 Good 0.46 (0.43–0.48) 0.44 (0.42–0.47) 0.57 (0.53–0.61)
 Chronic disease 3.09 (2.93–3.26) 3.23 (3.06–3.42) 2.21 (2.07–2.35)
 Constant 0.18 (0.15–0.22) 0.15 (0.12–0.18)
 Observations 63,260 63,260 34,520
  1. Note: Likelihood ratio test in random effects logistic model: LR =1086.53, p < 0.0001
  2. Hausman’s specification test is not significant at the 5% level: χ 2(20) =1268.40, p < 0.0001