Table 4.

Regression modelling for breast screening coverage among women aged 50–64 years

Model	Univariate			Population		General practice		Population and general practice
Deviance explained by model	–			70.7%		31.0%		70.6%
	OR (95% CI)	p Value (Wald, χ2)	Deviance explained, %	OR (95% CI)	p Value (Wald, χ2)	OR (95% CI)	p Value (Wald, χ2)	OR (95% CI)	p Value (Wald, χ2)
Population factors
Urbanisation, %	0.992 (0.991 to 0.993)	<0.001	50.5	0.996 (0.995 to 0.998)	<0.001	–		0.996 (0.995 to 0.998)	<0.001
London SHA (Q36)	0.642 (0.587 to 0.703)	<0.001	37.7	0.896 (0.811 to 0.990)	0.03	–		0.885 (0.806 to 0.970)	0.009
Deprivation, %	0.972 (0.967 to 0.978)	<0.001	38.8	0.991 (0.986 to 0.997)	0.002	_		0.991 (0.985 to 0.997)	0.004
Asian, black or mixed ethnicity, %	0.987 (0.985 to 0.989)	<0.001	49.1	0.999 (0.996 to 1.002)	NS (0.5)	–		–
‘Other’ ethnicity, %	0.880 (0.863 to 0.898)	<0.001	50.8	0.948 (0.923 to 0.973)	<0.001	–		0.945 (0.922 to 0.969)	<0.001
No higher education, %	1.010 (1.001 to 1.019)	NS (0.03)	3.1	–		–		–
General practice factors
Average practice list size	1.00 010 (1.00 007 to 1.00 012)	<0.001	26.5	–		1.000 046 (1.000 006 to 1.000 087)	0.03	1.00 001 (0.99 998 to 1.00 003)	0.6
Single-handed practices, %	0.988 (0.984 to 0.991)	<0.001	24.2	–		0.9945 (0.9886 to 1.0004)	NS (0.07)	–
Practitioner headcount per 105 population	0.996 (0.991 to 1.001)	NS (0.1)	1.7	–		–		–
Practice staff FTE	1.00 025 (1.00 015 to 1.00 035)	<0.001	14.1	–		1.000 099 0.999 990 to 1.000 209)	NS (0.07)	–
Practitioners qualified outside UK, %	0.993 (0.990 to 0.995)	<0.001	16.0	–		0.9992 (0.9957 to 1.0027)	NS (0.6)	–

FTE, full-time equivalent; NS, considered non-significant (see Methods section for details); SHA, strategic health authority.