Table 3

Hierarchical regression analyses of the effect of male index persons’ alcohol consumption and CAGE items on female spouses’ mental distress
Scaling of variable Ba 95% CI (B) betaa p adj. R 2 p for R 2 changed
Model 1: .015 .000
Age spouse Years .006 .004, . 008 .065 .001
Education 1 – 4b -.034 -.051, -.018 -.043 .001
Education spouse 1 – 4 b -.045 -.062, -.027 -.056 .001
Model 2: .015 .169
Age spouse Years .006 .004, .008 .066 .001
Education 1 – 4 b -.033 -.050, -.017 -.042 .001
Education spouse 1 – 4 b -.045 -.062, -.027 -.056 .001
Alcohol consumption 1 – 3 c -.043 -.105, .018 -.013 .169
Model 3: .017 <.000e
Age spouse Years .007 .005, .008 .070 .001
Education 1 – 4 b -.033 -.050, -.017 -.042 .001
Education spouse 1 – 4 b -.046 -.063, -.028 -.057 .001
Cut down 0, 1 -.009 -.080, .061 -.003 .793
Criticized 0, 1 .065 -.005, .135 .020 .070
Felt bad or guilty 0, 1 .045 .036, .154 .034 .002
Eye-opener 0, 1 .084 -.039, .206 .013 .182
Model 4: .017 <.000
Age spouse Years .007 .005, .008 .071 .001
Education 1 – 4 b -.032 -.048, -.015 -.040 .001
Education spouse 1 – 4 b -.045 -.063, -.028 -.057 .001
Alcohol consumption 1 – 3 c -.069 -.132, .006 -.020 .032
Cut down 0, 1 .002 -.069, .074 .001 .949
Criticized 0, 1 .068 -.002, .139 .021 .056
Felt bad or guilty 0, 1 .095 .036, .154 .034 .002
Eye-opener 0, 1 .086 -.037, .209 .013 .169
Model 5: .084 <.000
Age spouse Years .006 .005, .008 .068 .001
Education 1 – 4 b -.021 -.037, -.005 -.026 .012
Education spouse 1 – 4 b -.042 -.058, -.025 -.052 .001
Alcohol consumption 1 – 3 c -.085 -.149, .-021 -.025 .010
Cut down 0, 1 -.076 -.145, -.007 -.023 .032
Criticized 0, 1 .034 -.034, .102 .010 .325
Felt bad or guilty 0, 1 .002 -.056, .059 .001 .951
Eye-opener 0, 1 .018 -.100, .137 .003 .763
Mental distress standardized .250 .231, .270 .228 .001
Alcohol consumption spouse 1 – 3 b -.011 -.069, .047 -.004 .710
Cut down spouse 0, 1 .347 .215, .478 .054 .001
Criticized spouse 0, 1 .296 .124, .467 .033 .001
Felt bad or guilty spouse 0, 1 .327 .236, .418 .071 .001
Eye-opener spouse 0, 1 .389 .123, .655 .027 .004
N=11,584 couples

a B= unstandardized regression coefficient, beta=standardized regression coefficient.

b 1= primary school, 4 = ≥years at university/college.

c 1= low/moderate, lower 95%, 2 = high, 95-98%, 3= very high, top 2%.

d P-value of the F-test of the R2 change compared to former model.

e Compared to model 1.

Spouses’ own responses.

Rognmo et al.

Rognmo et al. BMC Public Health 2013 13:319   doi:10.1186/1471-2458-13-319

Open Data