Table 2.
Hazard model estimates of the association between marital experiences and subsequent onset of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD), (odds ratios; 95% confidence intervals in parentheses; N=10,516).
| Model | Female | Male | Total | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
| Marital Experiences | ||||||
| Ref: Never married | ||||||
| Married | 3.03*** (2.45, 3.74) |
1.11 (0.77, 1.62) |
2.28*** (1.91, 2.71) |
1.42** (1.09, 1,83) |
||
| Gender and Marital Experiences | ||||||
| Female, married | 1.94*** (1.49, 2.541) |
|||||
| Gender | ||||||
| Ref: Male | ||||||
| Female | 3.96*** (3.48, 4.51) |
2.54*** (2.04, 3.15) |
||||
| Had First Birth | ||||||
| Ref: No | ||||||
| Yes | 1.87*** (1.46, 2.41) |
1.31* (1.01, 1.69) |
1.65 (0.92, 2.96) |
1.58 (0.87, 2.88) |
1.32* (1.05, 1.68) |
1.32* (1.04, 1.67) |
| Covariates | ||||||
| Any other mental disorder | ||||||
| Ref: No | ||||||
| Yes | 34.55*** (26.63, 44.84) |
51.17*** (38.83, 67.42) |
2.72*** (1.64, 4.51) |
2.81*** (1.67, 4.73) |
19.40*** (15.42, 24.42) |
18.03*** (14.28, 22.75) |
| Ethnicity | ||||||
| Ref: High caste Hindu | ||||||
| Dalit | 1.36*** (1.14, 1.62) |
1.37*** (1.15, 1.64) |
1.35 (0.97, 1.89) |
1.35 (0.96, 1.89) |
1.35*** (1.16, 1.57) |
1.36*** (1.17, 1.59) |
| Hill Janajati | 1.01 (0.86, 1.18) |
1.03 (0.88, 1.21) |
1.20 (0.89, 1.63) |
1.20 (0.89, 1.62) |
1.03 (0.90, 1.19) |
1.04 (0.90, 1.19) |
| Terai Janajati | 0.94 (0.80, 1.11) |
0.98 (0.83, 1.16) |
0.92 (0.66, 1.30) |
0.92 (0.66, 1.29) |
0.96 (0.82, 1.11) |
0.97 (0.83, 1.12) |
| Newar | 0.91 (0.71, 1.18) |
0.94 (0.72, 1.21) |
0.84 (0.49, 1.44) |
0.84 (0.49, 1.44) |
0.92 (0.73, 1.16) |
0.93 (0.74, 1.17) |
| Education | ||||||
| Ref: No SLC | ||||||
| SLC or more | 0.63*** (0.53, 0.74) |
0.76** (0.64, 0.90) |
0.63*** (0.48, 0.83) |
0.64** (0.49, 0.84) |
0.70*** (0.61, 0.81) |
0.72*** (0.63, 0.83) |
| Age | ||||||
| Age | 1.25*** (1.21, 1.29) |
1.11*** (1.07, 1.16) |
1.18*** (1.11, 1.25) |
1.17*** (1.09, 1.25) |
1.12*** (1.08, 1.16) |
1.11*** (1.08, 1.15) |
| Birth Cohort | ||||||
| Ref: 1957–1971 | ||||||
| 1972–1981 | 0.99 (0.85, 1.16) |
1.04 (0.88, 1.21) |
1.11 (0.78, 1.57) |
1.11 (0.78, 1.58) |
1.05 (0.91, 1.21) |
1.05 (0.91, 1.21) |
| 1982–1991 | 0.89 (0.75, 1.06) |
0.94 (0.79, 1.11) |
1.92*** (1.33, 2.78) |
1.94*** (1.34, 2.80) |
1.07 (0.91, 1.25) |
1.06 (0.91, 1.24) |
| 1992–2001 | 1.35** (1.09, 1.67) |
1.52*** (1.23, 1.88) |
5.81*** (3.90, 8.67) |
5.92*** (3.95, 8.88) |
2.00*** (1.67, 2.40) |
1.98*** (1.65, 2.38) |
| N | 116,107.00 | 116,107.00 | 114,371.00 | 114,371.00 | 230,478.00 | 230,478.00 |
| Log likelihood (ll) | −6,407.56 | −6,351.59 | −2,124.14 | −2,123.97 | −8,564.57 | −8,552.89 |
| AIC | 12,841.12 | 12,731.18 | 4,274.27 | 4,275.95 | 17,159.14 | 17,137.77 |
| BIC | 12,966.73 | 12,866.45 | 4,399.69 | 4,411.01 | 17,314.36 | 17,303.34 |
1
Likelihood Ratio Test comparing model fit for Model 5 and Model 6 shows Model 6 significantly improves fit (Chi-square = 23.37, p < 0.001).
*
p<0.05,
**
p<0.01,
***
p<0.001