Skip to main content
. 2018 Jul 17;6(3):E276–E284. doi: 10.9778/cmajo.20170160

Table 3:

Logistic regression showing the relationship between patient’s ethnocultural group, patient–clinician concordance and continuity of care

Characteristic Relational continuity Informational continuity Management continuity



Concentrated care with regular provider
OR (95% CI)
Accumulated knowledge
OR (95% CI)
Information transfer
OR (95% CI)
No duplication of tests
OR (95% CI)
Primary care follow-up
OR (95% CI)
Patient’s ethnocultural group

 European descent Reference (–) Reference (–) Reference (–) Reference (–)

 Chinese 1.27 (0.64–2.50) 0.18 (0.12–0.27)* 0.34 (0.19–0.59)* 3.26 (1.32–8.02)* 0.49 (0.30–0.79)*

 South Asian 3.47 (1.66–7.23)* 0.87 (0.58–1.31) 0.78 (0.47–1.28) 1.33 (0.68–2.61) 0.72 (0.47–1.10)

 Indigenous 0.65 (0.38–1.11) 1.29 (0.86–1.94) 1.04 (0.67–1.62) 0.68 (0.38–1.220 1.19 (0.78–1.80)

Patient–clinician concordance

 Ethnocultural 1.41 (1.05–1.88)* 1.50 (1.26–1.79)* 1.20 (0.96–1.50) 1.41 (1.04–1.91)* 1.16 (0.96–1.40)

 Language 1.81 (1.00–3.28) 0.92 (0.62–1.37) 1.37 (0.83–2.27) 0.75 (0.35–1.161) 0.94 (0.58–1.52)

 Ethnocultural and language 1.57 (1.18–2.07)* 1.47 (1.24–1.74)* 1.25 (1.00–1.55) 1.46 (1.08–1.96)* 1.14 (0.95–1.38)

Note: CI = confidence interval, OR = odds ratio (adjusted for patient sociodemographic characteristics [sex, age, level of education, annual household income and born in Canada], self-rated health status and province, in addition to patient-reported experiences of care [first-contact accessibility and interpersonal communication] and patient–clinician sex concordance).

*

Statistically significant (p < 0.05). Responses of continuity of care were recoded into a dichotomous measure, where e.g., 0 = good/fair/poor and 1 = excellent/very good.