Skip to main content

Table 1 Background characteristics of the study participants for the whole sample and according to hearing status

From: Hearing loss and use of health services: a population-based cross-sectional study among Finnish older adults

  All, N = 2144 No hearing loss (BEHL0.5–2kHz ≤ 40 dB), N = 1352 Hearing loss (BEHL0.5–2kHz > 40 dB), N = 328  
Meana SEa Meana SEa Meana SEa p b
BEHL0.5–2kHz (dB), n = 1680 26 0.37 21 .25 52 1.0 <.001
Body mass index (kg/m2), n = 1867 27 0.12 28 .13 27 .30 .047
  N %a N %a N %a p c
Male, n = 2144 766 39 515 39 108 45 .063
Language, n = 2144        .338
 Finnish 1739 87 1237 92 283 90  
 Swedish 150 6.7 96 7.1 40 8.7  
 Other 299 5.8 19 1.3 5 1.6  
Lives alone, n = 1864 892 44 570 43 172 41 .648
Education, n = 1980        .029
 Highest 180 9.3 136 10 24 7.0  
 Middle 329 17 247 18 37 14  
 Lowest 1471 73 966 72 264 79  
Income, n = 2144        .004
 Highest tertile 729 36 533 39 65 30  
 Middle tertile 730 35 470 35 109 36  
 Lowest tertile 729 29 349 26 154 34  
Smoker, n = 1891 637 36 491 37 87 37 .999
Alcohol use ≥8 units/week, n = 1742 114 7.5 105 8.3 9 6.6 .489
Cardiovascular disease, n = 1985 1168 59 812 60 192 60 .990
Stroke, n = 1993 171 7.7 92 6.7 35 8.0 .427
Diabetes, n = 1996 256 12 159 12 52 15 .236
Arthritis, n = 1989 895 45 594 44 167 50 .067
Low vision, n = 1689 298 14 173 12 111 16 .034
Hearing aid user, n = 1975 118 5.1 12 0.8 94 33 <.001
  1. BEHL better ear hearing level threshold
  2. aWeighted and age-adjusted
  3. b p-value for comparison between Hearing loss and No hearing loss from linear regression analysis
  4. c p-value for comparison between Hearing loss and No hearing loss from logistic regression analysis