Table 2.

Effect of gender on activity rates - accounting for confounding variables

Effect	Estimate	95% confidence interval	P value
Model 1: Finished consultant episodes
Sample:1 6451 male and 886 female
Gender effect (additional activity by men)	160	116 to 204	<0.0001
Model 2: Casemix adjusted activity (£000)2
Sample: 6448 male and 884 female
Gender effect (additional activity by men)	214	147 to 280	<0.0001
Model 3: FCEs including contract and bonus payments as predictors
Sample: 6451 male and 886 female
Gender effect (additional activity by men)	153	109 to 197	<0.0001
Contract effect (additional activity by maximum part-time contract holders)	75	39 to 112	<0.0001
Effect of discretionary point or local CEA	48	17 to 79	0.003
Effect of distinction award or national CEA	−6	−53 to 39	0.8
Model 4: Casemix adjusted activity (£000) including contract and bonus payments as predictors
Sample: 6448 male and 884 female
Gender effect (additional activity by men)	204	138 to 271	<0.0001
Contract effect (additional activity by maximum part-time contract holders)	97	42 to 153	0.0006
Effect of discretionary point or local CEA	67	19 to 113	0.005
Effect of distinction award or national CEA	−17	−87 to 53	0.6

Notes:

¹Sample sizes differ due to linking of datasets and some missing variables

²Casemix-adjusted activity is estimated by summing the tariff cost of the healthcare related group (HRG) that is assigned to each episode