Multilevel models.

<p>CCD: Census Collection District | VPC: Variance Partition Coefficient | 95%CI: 95% Confidence Intervals</p><p>Multilevel models.</p

Socioeconomic trajectories in body mass index (BMI) across the adult lifecourse: adjusted mean BMI from a multilevel model with a 3-way interaction between neighborhood deprivation, age and gender

<p>Socioeconomic trajectories in body mass index (BMI) across the adult lifecourse: adjusted mean BMI from a multilevel model with a 3-way interaction between neighborhood deprivation, age and gender</p

Mean scores on the unhealthy lifestyle index by annual household income and neighborhood affluence, derived from fully adjusted multilevel linear regression models.

<p>The reference group is participants earning less than $20,000 a year while resident in the poorest neighborhoods (quintile 1).</p

Prevalence of poor health status across time (quarterly) with 95% confidence bands, by geographic region^2a, economic status^2b and occupational class^2c from January–March 2006 to October–December 2010 (inclusive).

<p>^2a Poor health status (by region) are adjusted for quarter, geographical region, quarter x geographical region, age group, gender, age group x gender, economic status, NS-SEC occupational class, educational qualifications, couple status, household tenure, country of birth, ethnicity, number of dependents. ^2b Poor health status (by economic status) is adjusted for quarter, economic status, quarter x economic status age group, gender, age group x gender, NS-SEC occupational class, educational qualifications, couple status, household tenure, country of birth, ethnicity, number of dependents, geographical region. ^2c Poor health status (by occupational class) is adjusted for quarter, occupational class, quarter x occupational class, age group, gender, age group x gender, educational qualifications, couple status, household tenure, country of birth, ethnicity, number of dependents, geographical region. Only people who were employed were fitted within this model. Created by the Authors using the UK Quarterly Labour Force Survey Jan–Mar 2006 to Oct–Dec 2010.</p

Associations between the unhealthy lifestyle index and a) poor self-rated health; b) poor self-rated quality of life; c) high risk of psychological distress (Odds Ratios and 95% Confidence Intervals are in reference to persons scoring zero unhealthy lifestyles).

<p>Models adjusted for educational qualifications, income, economic status, couple status, country of birth, neighborhood affluence and geographic remoteness.</p

Prevalence of unemployment^1a, poor health status^1b and health problems^1c with 95% confidence bands across time (quarterly) from January–March 2006 to October–December 2010 (inclusive).

<p>^1a Unemployment is based upon the International Labour Organization (ILO) definition, using only the economically active subsample (unemployed + employed) and adjusted for quarter (categorical format), age group, gender, age group x gender. ^1b Poor health status is adjusted for quarter, age group, gender, age group x gender, economic status, NS-SEC occupational class, educational qualifications, couple status, household tenure, country of birth, ethnicity, number of dependents, geographical region. ^1c Health problems (in separate models) are adjusted for quarter, age group, gender, age group x gender, economic status, NS-SEC occupational class, educational qualifications, couple status, household tenure, country of birth, ethnicity, number of dependents, geographical region. Created by the Authors using the UK Quarterly Labour Force Survey Jan–Mar 2006 to Oct–Dec 2010.</p

Composition of the unhealthy lifestyle index.

<p>Composition of the unhealthy lifestyle index.</p

Mean scores on the unhealthy lifestyle index: interaction between gender and age, adjusted for educational qualifications, income, economic status, couple status, country of birth, neighborhood affluence and geographic remoteness.

<p>Mean scores on the unhealthy lifestyle index: interaction between gender and age, adjusted for educational qualifications, income, economic status, couple status, country of birth, neighborhood affluence and geographic remoteness.</p

Association between public transport use and perceptions of public transport infrastructure.

<p>Association between public transport use and perceptions of public transport infrastructure.</p

Fully adjusted predictions for the cross-classification of perceptions of public transport and frequency of using of public transport, for 4 contrasting mental health indicators.

<p>Fully adjusted predictions for the cross-classification of perceptions of public transport and frequency of using of public transport, for 4 contrasting mental health indicators.</p