Table 4.
Associations between perceived neighbourhood disorder, individual and neighbourhood factors and common mental illness (three-level logistic regression)
| Odds ratio for being a case on CIS-R (95 % CI) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unadjusted OR | Model 1a | Model 2b | ||||
| Individual variables | ||||||
| Neighbourhood disorder | ||||||
| Low | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |||
| High | 2.12 | (1.54–2.91)*** | 1.84 | (1.33–2.55)*** | 1.55 | (1.13–2.13)** |
| Ever victimised | ||||||
| No | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||||
| Yes | 3.26 | (2.24–4.72)*** | 2.58 | (1.77–3.77)*** | ||
| Ever witness violence | ||||||
| No | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||||
| Yes | 2.40 | (1.71–3.37)*** | 2.06 | (1.42–2.99)*** | ||
| Neighbourhood variables | Variables added singly to Model 2: | |||||
| IMD Crime domain | ||||||
| 1st tertile (least deprived) | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||||
| 2nd tertile | 1.23 | (0.81–1.87) | 1.17 | (0.79–1.73) | ||
| 3rd tertile (most deprived) | 1.02 | (0.66–1.57) | 0.96 | (0.63–1.46) | ||
| IMD Income domain | ||||||
| 1st tertile (least deprived) | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||||
| 2nd tertile | 1.49 | (0.98–2.25) | 1.18 | (0.80–1.74) | ||
| 3rd tertile (most deprived) | 1.46 | (0.96–2.21) | 1.14 | (0.74–1.76) | ||
| Total IMD | ||||||
| 1st tertile (least deprived) | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||||
| 2nd tertile | 1.68 | (1.12–2.52) | 1.25 | (0.85–1.84) | ||
| 3rd tertile (most deprived) | 1.55 | (1.02–2.37)* | 1.27 | (0.83–1.95) | ||
CIS-R revised clinical interview schedule, IMD index of multiple deprivation 2010
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001
aControlled for sex, age, ethnicity, household income, education and occupation
bControlled for sex, age, ethnicity, household income, education, occupation, victimisation and witnessing violence