Differences in ambulatory care fragmentation by race

Table 4 Unadjusted and adjusted associations among race, income, education, and healthcare fragmentation

	Coefficients (95% Confidence Intervals)
	Unadjusted	Model 1	Model 2	Model 3	Model 4
Race (black vs. white)	−0.039*** (−0.047,-0.031)	−0.033*** (−0.043,-0.024)	− 0.037*** (− 0.047,-0.027)	−0.024*** (− 0.034,-0.013)	−0.027*** (− 0.040,-0.015)
Annual household income (<$35,000 vs. ≥$35,000)	− 0.029*** (− 0.037,− 0.021)	-0.021*** (− 0.030,-0.012)	−0.017*** (− 0.027,-0.007)	−0.013* (− 0.024,-0.003)	−0.010 (− 0.021,0.002)
Educational attainment (high school or less vs. some college or more)	− 0.030*** (− 0.034,-0.019)	−0.013*** (− 0.022,-0.004)	−0.012** (− 0.022,-0.003)	−0.009 (− 0.019,0.001)	−0.002 (− 0.013,0.009)

These models used linear regression to determine associations among race, income, and educational attainment (as independent variables) and healthcare fragmentation (as a dependent variable, using the continuous reversed Bice-Boxerman Index). Negative coefficients indicate lower fragmentation scores than the reference group
Unadjusted models were bivariate models, with race, income, and education in separate models
Model 1 includes race, income, and education in the same model
Model 2 includes Model 1 covariates plus age, sex, marital status, geographic region, and type of geography
Model 3 includes Model 2 covariates plus medical conditions and medications (as shown in Table 1)
Model 4 includes Model 3 covariates plus health behaviors, psychosocial variables, physiological variables, and self-rated health (as shown in Table 1)
*p < 0.05. **p ≤ 0.01. ***p ≤ 0.001

ISSN: 1472-6963