Skip to main content
. 2007 May;61(5):427–433. doi: 10.1136/jech.2007.061739

Table 2 Associations of procedural and interactional justice with smoking status: adjusted ORs and their 95% CIs from logistic regression models with generalised estimating equations.

Participants, n ORs (95% CI), adjusted for:
Age (A) A + education, SEP, marital status, job contract and NA (B) B+job strain and ERI (C)
Women 27 121
 Procedural justice
  High 9888 1.00 1.00 1.00
  Intermediate 8740 0.96 (0.89 to 1.04) 0.95 (0.88 to 1.03) 0.94 (0.87 to 1.02)
  Low 8493 1.05 (0.96 to 1.13) 1.05 (0.96 to 1.13) 1.02 (0.94 to 1.11)
 Interactional justice
  High 9642 1.00 1.00 1.00
  Intermediate 9095 0.97 (0.90 to 1.05) 0.96 (0.89 to 1.04) 0.96 (0.88 to 1.03)
  Low 8384 1.09 (1.01 to 1.19) 1.01 (0.93 to 1.10) 0.99 (0.91 to 1.07)
Men 6900
 Procedural justice
  High 2581 1.00 1.00 1.00
  Intermediate 2047 1.07 (0.93 to 1.24) 0.96 (0.83 to 1.11) 0.96 (0.83 to 1.10)
  Low 2272 1.11 (0.96 to 1.29) 0.96 (0.83 to 1.11) 0.94 (0.81 to 1.09)
 Interactional justice
  High 2227 1.00 1.00 1.00
  Intermediate 2521 1.05 (0.91 to 1.22) 1.00 (0.86 to 1.15) 1.00 (0.86 to 1.15)
  Low 2152 1.11 (0.96 to 1.29) 0.97 (0.83 to 1.13) 0.95 (0.82 to 1.11)

ERI, effort–reward imbalance; NA, negative affectivity; SEP, socioeconomic position.