Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2014 Dec 1.
Published in final edited form as: Qual Life Res. 2013 Apr 17;22(10):2709–2720. doi: 10.1007/s11136-013-0374-0

Table 4.

Adjusted Mean Scores on Socioeconomic Well-Being by Ethnicity and Acculturation Status

Dependent variable: Socioeconomic Well-Being
Independent variables Final Model 1 Final Model 2
Mean (95% CI) ΔM (95% CI) Mean (95%CI) ΔM (95% CI)
Annual household
  income
  ≥ 100k 35.23 (34.15,
36.31)
11.58 (9.39,
13.77)****
34.69 (33.50,
35.88)
10.28 (7.92, 12.64)
****
  30k- 99k 33.61 (32.48,
34.74)
9.96 (7.76,
12.16)****
33.24 (32.04,
34.45)
8.83 (6.51, 11.16)
****
  ≤ 30k 23.65 (22.07,
25.22)
Ref. 24.41 (22.68,
26.13)
Ref.
Chemotherapy
  Yes 31.61 (30.88,
32.35)
1.56 (0.04, 3.16) 31.60 (30.72,
32.49)
1.65 (0.07, 3.22)*
  No 30.05 (28.60,
31.50)
Ref. 29.95 (28.46,
31.45)
Ref.
Ethnicity
  Chinese American 29.64 (28.65,
30.64)
−2.38 (−3.69, −
1.06)***
  NHW 32.02 (30.90,
33.13)
Ref.
Acculturation status
  US-born
Chinese/NHW group
32.25 (31.19,
33.32)
3.77 (1.91,
5.65)****
  High-acculturated
Chinese immigrants
31.61 (29.59,
33.62)
3.13 (0.33, 5.92)*
  Low-acculturated
Chinese immigrants
28.48 (27.26,
29.70)
Ref.

Note. Ref=reference group. Mean difference (ΔM) score = the mean scores of a comparison group − the mean scores of the reference group. Higher SWB mean scores indicate greater SWB. Pairwise comparisons were conducted among all levels; however, there were no significant mean differences between women with annual household income larger than 100k and 30–99k and between high-acculturated Chinese immigrants and US-born Chinese/NHW group. Both initial linear regression models included education, insurance coverage, and interaction terms between ethnicity (or acculturation status) and income categories, all of which were not significant in the final models.

p=.055;

*

p<.05;

**

p<.01;

***

p<.001;

****

p<.0001