Skip to main content

Table 3 Multi-level logistic regression models for referral to the LMP

From: Predictors of primary care referrals to a vascular disease prevention lifestyle program among participants in a cluster randomised trial

Explanatory variables

 

Empty model

Model 11

Patient characteristics

 

OR (95% CI)

OR (95% CI)

SEIFA quintile2

1 - poorest

 

1.00 (reference)

 

2

 

9.87 (0.21, 471.1)

 

3

 

1.44 (0.12, 17.53)

 

4

 

3.36 (0.09, 122.4)

 

5 - richest

 

7.18 (0.33, 155.1)

BMI

<25

 

1.00 (reference)

 

≥25

 

2.87 (1.10, 7.47)

Physical activity

Active

 

1.00 (reference)

 

Inactive

 

2.90 (1.36, 6.14)

Stage of change for increasing fruit and vegetables

Maintenance

 

1.00 (reference)

 

Contemplation/preparation/action

 

0.70 (0.28, 1.78)

 

Pre-contemplation

 

0.61 (0.11, 3.49)

Stage of change for decreasing dietary fat intake

Maintenance

 

1.00 (reference)

 

Contemplation/preparation/action

 

1.56 (0.60, 4.05)

 

Pre-contemplation

 

2.88 (0.47, 17.71)

Stage of change for increasing physical activity

Maintenance

 

1.00 (reference)

 

Contemplation/preparation/action

 

2.75 (1.07, 7.03)

 

Pre-contemplation

 

0.83 (0.14, 4.79)

Stage of change for losing weight

Maintenance

 

1.00 (reference)

 

Contemplation/preparation/action

 

1.20 (0.41, 3.48)

 

Pre-contemplation

 

1.59 (0.46, 5.52)

GP advice/referral for physical activity in previous 3 months

No

 

1.00 (reference)

 

Yes

 

1.43 (0.68, 3.00)

Practice characteristics

   

Practice location

urban

 

1.00 (reference)

 

rural

 

12.50 (1.43, 109.7)

Practice size:

≥ 3 GPs

 

1.00 (reference)

 

1-3 GPs

 

16.05 (2.74, 94.24)

Between patient variance (SE3)

 

1.176 (0.852)

1.045 (0.627)

Intra class correlation

 

0.263

0.241

Explained variance 4 (%)

 

-

11.14

  1. *P < 0.05.
  2. Statistically significant p-values (<0.05) are shown in bold.
  3. Multilevel logistic regression1 Model 1: includes all variables found to be significant in univariate analysis. 2 2006 index of relative socio-economic advantage/disadvantage, 3 Standard error, 4 Explained ‘between practice’ variance using the variance in the empty model as reference.