Skip to main content

Table 5 Prevalence ratio (PR) of functional disability between sexes by different indexes

From: Sex disparities in the prevalence of physical function disabilities: a population-based study in a low-income community

  Logistic Regression Model
Univariate Model with all subjects Multivariate Models with all subjects Multivariate Models in participants with high impact Multivariate Models participants with low-moderate impact
Functional disability index Sex \( {PR}_{unadjusted}^{Fem\ vs\ Males} \) (1) (95% CI) (95% CI) \( {PR}_{adjusted}^{Fem\ vs\ Males} \)(2) (95% CI) \( {PR}_{adjusted}^{Fem\ vs\ Males} \) (3) (95% CI) \( {PR}_{adjusted}^{Fem\ vs\ Males} \) (4) (95% CI)
T-score Male 1 1 1 1
Female 1.64 (1.2,2.1) a 2.70 (1.4,5.1) a 2.11 (1.1,3.5) b 1.02 (0.2,6.7)
IADL Male 1 1 1 1
Female 1.82 (1.3,2.5) a 3.64 (1.1,4.4) a 2.63 (1.2,5.7) b 0.95 (0.4,2.3)
Self-Care Male 1 1 1 1
Female 1.50 (1.1,2.1) b 3.29 (1.1,9.9) b 3.42 (1.3,5.8) a 1.85 (0.1,7.4)
Functional Mobility Male 1 1 1 1
Female 1.68 (1.2,2.3) a 2.81 (1.3,5.7) a 2.60 (1.1,4.5) b 1.04 (0.2,6.9)
  1. a (p < 0.001), b (p < 0.05), (*) No significant interaction terms were found in the model (p > 0.05),
  2. (1) Unadjusted for any potential confounders (only the sampling design was taking into account)
  3. (2) Adjusted for age, income, marital status, number of chronic conditions and sampling design
  4. (3) Adjusted for age, income, marital status and sampling design; among participants with high impact on functional disabilities
  5. (4) Adjusted for age, income, marital status and sampling design; among participants with low-moderate impact on functional disabilities