Skip to main content

Table 4 Regression results: association between environmental quality indicators and directly age/sex standardised good/very good, and bad/very bad health prevalence (%)

From: Beyond greenspace: an ecological study of population general health and indicators of natural environment type and quality

Environmental quality measures Model 1: Unadjusted Model 2: Adjusted for IoD and urbanity
  B 95% CI p B 95% CI p
Good/Very Good Health
Shannon Land Cover Diversity Index 2.308 2.168,2.449 <0.001 0.274 0.220,0.329 <0.001
Bird species richness (+10 species) 0.456 0.398,0.515 <0.001 0.022 0.001,0.043 0.043
Freshwater ecological quality indicator -0.629 -0.791,-0.467 <0.001 -0.095 -0.153,-0.037 0.001
Protected/designated areas kernel density indicator (10 km search radius) 0.234 0.184,0.284 <0.001 0.132 0.114,0.150 <0.001
Bad/Very Bad Health
Shannon Land Cover Diversity Index -1.093 -1.162,-1.024 <0.001 -0.087 -0.117,-0.057 <0.001
Bird species richness (+10 species) -0.237 -0.265,-0.208 <0.001 0.000 -0.011,0.012 0.962
Freshwater ecological quality indicator 0.293 0.213,0.372 <0.001 0.039 0.008,0.071 0.015
Protected/designated areas kernel density indicator (10 km search radius) -0.100 -0.125,-0.076 <0.001 -0.052 -0.061,-0.042 <0.001
  1. B = change in directly age/sex standardised prevalence (%) of good/very good health associated with unit increase in environmental quality indicators. Bold coefficient - association in hypothesised direction, p < 0.05. Italicised coefficient - association in opposite direction to that hypothesised, p < 0.05.