Table 2.
Social network and family composition: the risk of not attending mammography screening
| Factor | Category | Attendees | Non-attendees | OR (95 % CI) | OR (95 % CI) | OR (95 % CI) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N (%) | N (%) | Crude | Age-adjusted | Adjusteda | ||
| Marital status | Married | 635 (47.8) | 46 (37.1) | 1.00 (reference) | 1.00 (reference) | 1.00 (reference) |
| Unmarried | 104 (7.8) | 16 (12.9) | 2.12 (1.16–3.90) | 2.26 (1.23–4.16) | 2.40 (1.30–4.45) | |
| Divorced/widow | 581 (44.8) | 61 (49.2) | 1.45 (0.97–2.16) | 1.34 (0.90–2.01) | 1.31 (0.87–1.97) | |
| Missing | 8 (0.6) | 1 (0.8) | – | – | – | |
| Children | Yes | 1132 (85.2) | 99 (79.8) | 1.00 (reference) | 1.00 (reference) | 1.00 (reference) |
| No | 150 (11.3) | 22 (17.7) | 1.69 (1.03–2.74) | 1.74 (1.06–2.85) | 1.77 (1.08–2.92) | |
| Missing | 46 (3.5) | 3 (2.4) | – | – | – | |
| Living alone | No | 710 (53.5) | 56 (45.2) | 1.00 (reference) | 1.00 (reference) | 1.00 (reference) |
| Yes | 609 (45.9) | 68 (54.8) | 1.42 (0.98–2.05) | 1.31 (0.90–1.91) | 1.30 (0.89–1.90) | |
| Missing | 9 (0.7) | 0 | – | – | – | |
| Social participation | High | 983 (74.0) | 88 (71.0) | 1.00 (reference) | 1.00 (reference) | 1.00 (reference) |
| Low | 343 (25.8) | 36 (29.0) | 1.17 (0.78–1.76) | 1.05 (0.71–1.63) | 0.95 (0.62–1.47) | |
| Missing | 2 (0.2) | 0 | – | – | – | |
| Social anchorage | High | 1218 (91.7) | 111 (89.5) | 1.00 (reference) | 1.00 (reference) | 1.00 (reference) |
| Low | 110 (8.3) | 13 (10.5) | 1.30 (0.71–2.38) | 1.36 (0.74–2.51) | 1.32 (0.71–2.43) | |
| Missing | 0 | 0 | – | – | – | |
| Instrumental support | High | 997 (75.1) | 87 (70.2) | 1.00 (reference) | 1.00 (reference) | 1.00 (reference) |
| Low | 328 (24.7) | 37 (29.8) | 1.29 (0.86–1.94) | 1.25 (0.83–1.87) | 1.21 (0.81–1.83) | |
| Missing | 3 (0.2) | 0 | – | – | – |
aSocioeconomic factors: age, born in Sweden, level of education and occupation