Table 5.
Logistic model (0 vs. > 0) |
Zero-truncated NB (>0) |
||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Explanatory variable | N | OR | 95%CI | RR | 95%CI |
MALE | |||||
Model 1 (unadjusted) | |||||
(Intercept) | 0.85 | 0.76–0.95 | 3.04 | 2.34–3.94 | |
No psychosocial load | 1215 | 1.00 | ref. | 1.00 | ref. |
Psychosocial load, but normal SCC | 2142 | 0.79 | 0.69–0.91 | 1.59 | 1.31–1.92 |
Abnormal SCC | 497 | 1.45 | 1.17–1.78 | 3.25 | 2.49–4.25 |
Model 2 (adjusted) | |||||
(Intercept) | 0.94 | 0.80–1.10 | 2.51 | 2.00–3.16 | |
No psychosocial load | 1215 | 1.00 | ref. | 1.00 | ref. |
Psychosocial load, but normal SCC | 2142 | 0.79 | 0.68–0.91 | 1.34 | 1.12–1.60 |
Abnormal SCC | 497 | 1.35 | 1.09–1.67 | 2.21 | 1.72–2.82 |
Age ≥30 and <40 | 987 | 1.00 | ref. | 1.00 | ref. |
Age <30 | 190 | 0.89 | 0.65–1.22 | 0.96 | 0.66–1.41 |
Age ≥40 and <50 | 1135 | 0.84 | 0.70–1.00 | 1.52 | 1.24–1.87 |
Age ≥50 and <60 | 1242 | 0.63 | 0.53–0.74 | 1.59 | 1.29–1.96 |
Age ≥60 | 300 | 0.66 | 0.50–0.86 | 1.58 | 1.13–2.21 |
SA before the questionnaire | 1.049 | 1.038–1.060 | 1.034 | 1.026–1.042 | |
FEMALE | |||||
Model 1 (unadjusted) | |||||
(Intercept) | 1.10 | 0.94–1.28 | 5.83 | 4.76–7.14 | |
No psychosocial load | 648 | 1.00 | ref. | 1.00 | ref. |
Psychosocial load, but normal SCC | 1962 | 1.04 | 0.87–1.25 | 1.20 | 0.98–1.47 |
Abnormal SCC | 595 | 1.70 | 1.35–2.13 | 2.62 | 2.06–3.33 |
Model 2 (adjusted) | |||||
(Intercept) | 1.10 | 0.89–1.36 | 5.01 | 3.96–6.33 | |
No psychosocial load | 648 | 1.00 | ref. | 1.00 | ref. |
Psychosocial load, but normal SCC | 1962 | 1.00 | 0.84–1.20 | 1.21 | 1.00–1.47 |
Abnormal SCC | 595 | 1.45 | 1.15–1.84 | 2.39 | 1.89–3.01 |
Age ≥30 and <40 | 661 | 1.00 | ref. | 1.00 | ref. |
Age <30 | 171 | 1.08 | 0.77–1.54 | 0.64 | 0.46–0.91 |
Age ≥40 and <50 | 935 | 0.87 | 0.71–1.07 | 0.91 | 0.74–1.12 |
Age ≥50 and <60 | 1201 | 0.78 | 0.64–0.94 | 1.18 | 0.97–1.45 |
Age ≥60 | 237 | 0.63 | 0.47–0.86 | 1.52 | 1.09–2.13 |
SA before the questionnaire | 1.051 | 1.040–1.062 | 1.020 | 1.014–1.026 |
Logistic model refers to model component for predicting membership to subpopulation A with high propensity to zero absence, and Zero-truncated NB to the component predicting days on sick leave among susceptible subpopulation B. To facilitate interpretation, for zero-inflation we show odds ratios associated with complementary propensity to having any sickness absence—that is, inclusion in subpopulation B. Bold values denote statistical significance at the p < 0.05 level.