Table 2 Crude and adjusted association between PIR and all-cause mortality in different models.

From: Nonlinear associations between the ratio of family income to poverty and all-cause mortality among adults in NHANES study

Exposure

Model 1

Model 2

Model 3

HR (95% CI)

P value

HR (95% CI)

P value

HR (95% CI)

P value

PIR classification

0.77 (0.74, 0.79)

 < 0.001

0.76 (0.73, 0.79)

 < 0.001

0.79 (0.76, 0.82)

 < 0.001

Low income (PIR < 1)

1.00 (Reference)

1.00 (Reference)

1.00 (Reference)

Middle income (PIR 1–4)

0.93 (0.81, 1.06)

0.264

0.72 (0.63, 0.82)

 < 0.001

0.80 (0.70, 0.92)

0.002

High income (PIR⩾4) P for trend

0.33 (0.27, 0.39)

 < 0.001

0.31 (0.25, 0.37)

 < 0.001

0.38 (0.31, 0.47)

 < 0.001

  

 < 0.001

 

 < 0.001

 

 < 0.001

  1. Model 1: no covariates were adjusted. Model 2: age, gender, and race/ethnicity were adjusted. Model 3: all covariates presented in Table 1 were adjusted. A P value (P for trend) < 0.05 suggests that the linear trend is statistically significant. PIR, Ratio of family income to poverty.
Back to article page