Table 3.
Multilevel linear regression estimates of interaction effects between food insecurity and two social network characteristics, separately, in predicting depression symptom severity among men aged 18 years or older in eight villages in rural south-western Uganda
| Model 2 – Men; including personal social ‘closeness’ in the village network | Model 2 – Men; including ‘percentage of personal network contacts who are poor’ | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| b | 95 % CI | b | 95 % CI | |
| Main effects | ||||
| Intercept | 1·16*** | 1·05, 1·26 | 1·04*** | 0·86, 1·21 |
| No food insecurity (reference) | – | – | – | – |
| Mild food insecurity | −0·06 | −0·19, 0·06 | 0·04 | −0·11, 0·20 |
| Moderate food insecurity | −0·03 | −0·14, 0·08 | 0·05 | −0·08, 0·19 |
| Severe food insecurity | 0·16* | 0·08, 0·33 | 0·49** | 0·32, 0·65 |
| Closeness centrality (continuous quintiles) | −0·04** | −0·07, −0·01 | – | – |
| Percentage of network who are poor (based on quintiles representing 0 to 100 %) | – | – | 0·01 | −0·04, 0·05 |
| Interaction effects | ||||
| Closeness centrality × No food insecurity | – | – | – | – |
| Closeness centrality × Mild food insecurity | 0·03 | −0·01, 0·08 | – | – |
| Closeness centrality × Moderate food insecurity | 0·06** | 0·01, 0·10 | – | – |
| Closeness centrality × Severe food insecurity | 0·07** | 0·02, 0·13 | – | – |
| Percentage of contacts who are poor × No food insecurity | – | – | – | – |
| Percentage of contacts who are poor × Mild food insecurity | – | – | −0·02 | −0·09, 0·05 |
| Percentage of contacts who are poor × Moderate food insecurity | – | – | 0·01 | −0·05, 0·07 |
| Percentage of contacts who are poor × Severe food insecurity | – | – | −0·07* | −0·15, −0·01 |
Estimates were obtained using a two-level, random-intercepts linear regression model which accounted for clustering at the household level and adjusted for all covariates included in Model 1 in Table 2, as well as for total degree.
*P<0·05, **P<0·01, ***P<0·001.