Skip to main content

Table 3 Odds of mental health illness in rural and urban women

From: Rural-urban differences in the mental health of perinatal women: a UK-based cross-sectional study

Outcome variable Urban (N = 165) n (%) Rural (N = 130) n (%) Overalln (%) Logistic regression model OR (SE) –Rural (cf urban) 95% CI p value
Positive for depression and/or anxiety 47 (28.5%) 52 (40.0%) 99 (33.6%) Model 1 1.67 (0.42) 1.03 to 2.72 .038*
Model 2 1.57 (0.40) 0.95 to 2.58 .078
Model 3 1.65 (0.46) 0.96 to 2.84 .070
Positive for depression - EPDS 30 (18.2%) 36 (27.7%) 66 (22.4%) Model 1 1.72 (0.48) 0.99 to 2.99 .053
Model 2 1.62 (0.48) 0.91 to 2.89 .100
Model 3 1.69 (0.55) 0.90 to 3.19 .106
Positive for depression - Whooley 40 (24.2%) 44 (33.9%) 84 (28.5%) Model 1 1.60 (0.41) 0.96 to 2.66 .071
Model 2 1.54 (0.40) 0.92 to 2.58 .103
Model 3 1.58 (0.45) 0.91 to 2.75 .105
Positive for anxiety - GAD-2 19 (11.5%) 18 (13.9%) 37 (12.5%) Model 1 1.23 (0.43) 0.62 to 2.46 .549
Model 2 1.24 (0.44) 0.61 to 2.50 .551
Model 3 1.16 (0.45) 0.54 to 2.50 .696
  1. *p < .05; OR - Odds ratio. SE – Standard error. Percentages correspond to unadjusted (raw) differences; denominator is N of rural/urban women. N = 295 for all models 1 & 2; N = 294 for all models 3
  2. Model 1 – Association between rurality and outcome variable, unadjusted
  3. Model 2 – Same as model 1, adjusted for IMD decile (by tertiles) and perinatal stage
  4. Model 3 – Same as model 2, also adjusted for social support (MSPSS total score)