Skip to main content

Table 3 Estimates from models of the impact of joint advantaged characteristics of partners and children on the risk of transition to any long-term care uptake (Model 1) and institutionalized care (Model 2), net of characteristics of the focal older adulta

From: Do characteristics of family members influence older persons’ transition to long-term healthcare services?

  Model 1: Any long-term care Model 2: Institutionalized care
Men Women Men Women
% ORb CIc % OR CI % OR CI % OR CI
Advantaged family networkd
 No partner, no child 7.5 1 ref 6.9 1 ref 9.0 1 ref 8.7 1 ref
 No partner, child near and advantaged 3.9 0.86 0.82–0.89 10.2 0.90 0.87–0.93 4.3 0.92 0.88–0.96 11.4 0.90 0.88–0.93
 No partner, child near and not advantaged 4.3 0.92 0.89–0.95 11.6 0.95 0.93–0.98 5.1 0.97 0.93–1.00 14.3 0.97 0.95–0.99
 No partner, child far and advantaged 4.3 0.88 0.84–0.91 7.9 0.97 0.94–1.00 4.7 0.92 0.88–0.95 9.1 0.91 0.88–0.94
 No partner, child far and not advantaged 2.9 0.96 0.92–0.99 4.2 1.05 1.01–1.08 3.4 0.96 0.92–0.99 5.5 0.99 0.97–1.02
 Partner not advantaged, no child 5.1 0.64 0.62–0.66 3.4 0.71 0.69–0.74 5.0 0.69 0.66–0.71 3.0 0.75 0.72–0.79
 Partner not advantaged, child near and advantaged 22.1 0.52 0.51–0.54 16.9 0.53 0.52–0.55 20.9 0.59 0.57–0.61 14.4 0.57 0.55–0.59
 Partner not advantaged, child near and not advantaged 18.0 0.59 0.57–0.60 14.2 0.64 0.62–0.66 17.4 0.65 0.63–0.67 12.5 0.71 0.69–0.74
 Partner not advantaged, child far and advantaged 18.5 0.52 0.51–0.54 13.7 0.57 0.55–0.58 17.6 0.58 0.56–0.60 11.8 0.58 0.56–0.60
 Partner not advantaged, child far and not advantaged 6.7 0.60 0.58–0.62 4.8 0.73 0.70–0.75 6.5 0.65 0.62–0.67 4.3 0.75 0.72–0.79
 Partner advantaged, no child 0.4 0.41 0.36–0.48 0.3 0.38 0.31–0.46 0.4 0.33 0.26–0.43 0.2 0.38 0.27–0.52
 Partner advantaged, child near and advantaged 2.9 0.34 0.32–0.37 2.8 0.31 0.28–0.33 2.6 0.35 0.31–0.39 2.2 0.33 0.29–0.37
 Partner advantaged, child near and not advantaged 0.8 0.43 0.38–0.48 0.8 0.41 0.37–0.46 0.8 0.50 0.43–0.59 0.7 0.43 0.36–0.52
 Partner advantaged, child far and advantaged 2.2 0.34 0.31–0.37 2.0 0.33 0.31–0.36 2.0 0.34 0.30–0.39 1.6 0.31 0.27–0.36
 Partner advantaged, child far and not advantaged 0.4 0.42 0.36–0.50 0.4 0.41 0.35–0.49 0.4 0.38 0.29–0.49 0.3 0.42 0.31–0.55
Covariates (focal older adult)
 2+ children (ref = 1 child) 74.4 0.94 0.92–0.96 76.0 0.92 0.91–0.94 72.8 0.93 0.91–0.95 73.5 0.94 0.92–0.95
 Immigrant (ref = not an immigrant) 4.4 0.80 0.78–0.83 5.0 0.78 0.76–0.81 4.2 0.72 0.68–0.75 4.7 0.74 0.72–0.77
 High education (ref = low education) 47.1 0.93 0.92–0.94 29.5 0.90 0.88–0.91 45.3 0.96 0.95–0.98 26.7 0.91 0.89–0.92
 Lowest income quartile 22.4 1 ref 26.7 1 ref 24.7 1 ref 26.0 1 ref
 2nd lowest income quartile 25.1 0.93 0.91–0.94 19.9 0.96 0.94–0.98 25.5 0.93 0.91–0.95 22.9 0.99 0.97–1.01
 2nd highest income quartile 25.3 0.77 0.75–0.78 24.5 0.90 0.89–0.92 24.6 0.79 0.77–0.81 25.0 0.95 0.93–0.97
 Highest income quartile 27.2 0.52 0.50–0.53 28.9 0.69 0.67–0.70 25.2 0.53 0.51–0.55 26.2 0.78 0.77–0.80
Total person-years (pyrs) 1.95 mill 2.01 mill 2.17 mill 2.51 mill
Number of persons/Number of transitions 402,966/96,736 417,180/118,602 432,777/70,508 491,237/105,746
Pseudo R/Log pseudolikelihood 0.09/− 349,836 0.09/− 410,343 0.12/− 272,483 0.13/− 380,658
  1. aThis table portrays estimates from four fully adjusted models: Model 1 and Model 2 for males and females, respectively. In addition to the estimates shown, the models were also adjusted for the focal older adult’s age group and year
  2. bOdds ratio. Estimates not in bold are statistically significant at the 5% level
  3. c95% confidence interval
  4. dThe groups are mutually exclusive. Near is defined as < 10 km