Table 3

Predictors of Improved RIBS Score (binary yes/no) (n = 83)
Individual social contact elements Individual social contact elements Individual social contact elements Individual social contact elements Additive social contact
OR(95% CI) OR(95% CI) OR(95% CI) OR(95% CI) OR(95% CI)
Age 1.1 (1.0, 1.1) 1.1 (1.0, 1.1) 1.1(1.0, 1.1) 1.1 (1.0, 1.1) 1.1 (1.0, 1.1)
Gender 1.5 (0.2, 9.9) 2.0 (0.3, 2.8) 1.6 (0.2, 0.7) 1.8 (0.3, 2.7) 1.6 (0.2, 1.0)
BME 5.6 (1.0, 31.5) 6.1 (1.1, 33.3) 6.7 (1.1, 9.2) 6.0 (1.1, 3.1) 6.1 (1.1, 4.5)
Experience of Mental Health Problems (yes/no) 2.0 (0.4, 10.0) 2.7 (0.5, 13.6) 2.5 (0.5, 12.4) 2.1 (0.4, 10.8) 2.3 (0.5, 11.6)
Facilitating Social contact Factorsa
 Equal Status Common 2.4 (0.7, 7.7) -- -- -- --
 Goals -- 2.0 (0.9, 4.7) -- -- --
 Intergroup cooperation -- -- *2.5 (1.1, 5.9) -- --
 Friendship potential -- -- -- 2.8 (0.6, 11.8) --
Quality of Social contact (Number of factors) -- -- -- -- *1.4 (1.0, 1.8)
Initial RIBS Score 1.0 (0.8, 1.3) 1.0 (0.8, 1.3) 1.0 (0.8, 1.3) 1.0 (0.8, 1.3) 1.0 (0.8, 1.3)
Initial willingness to disclose 1.0 (0.6, 1.5) 1.0 (0.6, 1.5) 1.0 (0.6, 1.5) 1.0 (0.6, 1.5) 1.0 (0.6, 1.5)

p < 0.05

afacilitating social contact conditions refer tothe specific conditions theorised by Allport and Pettigrew as being associated with optimal social contact

Evans-Lacko et al.

Evans-Lacko et al. BMC Public Health 2012 12:489   doi:10.1186/1471-2458-12-489

Open Data