Skip to main content

Table 4 Association between women’s sociodemographic characteristics and being asked about mental health during the postnatal check appointment across surveys

From: Disparities in who is asked about their perinatal mental health: an analysis of cross-sectional data from consecutive national maternity surveys

 

2014 survey

N  = 4571

2018 survey

N  = 4509

2020 survey

N  = 4611

 

n

%

OR

95%CI

aOR a

95% CI

n

%

OR

95%CI

aOR a

95% CI

n

%

OR

95%CI

aOR a

95% CI

Total n % (95%CI)

4035

88.2

    

3652

78.3

(76.8, 79.8)

   

3438

73.7

(72.2, 75.2)

   

Age of Mother

 16–19

79

79.1

0.42

0.24, 0.73

0.35

0.19, 0.65

46

80.0

0.92

0.46, 1.82

0.98

0.44, 2.14

37

87.4

2.16

0.92, 5.08

2.14

0.89, 5.15

 20–24

457

86.1

0.68

0.49, 0.95

0.73

0.50, 1.06

251

69.8

0.53

0.40, 0.71

0.60

0.43, 0.83

245

69.5

0.71

0.54, 0.94

0.77

0.57, 1.04

 25–29

1082

88.3

0.84

0.64, 1.10

0.82

0.61, 1.09

837

76.0

0.73

0.58, 0.92

0.78

0.61, 0.99

790

68.7

0.69

0.57, 0.83

0.71

0.58, 0.87

 30–34

1426

90.0

1

 

1

 

1426

81.3

1

 

1

 

1347

76.2

1

 

1

 

 35–39

780

89.4

0.94

0.69, 1.27

0.90

0.66, 1.24

862

81.0

0.98

0.78, 1.23

1.01

0.79, 1.29

839

75.2

0.95

0.78, 1.16

0.94

0.77, 1.16

 40 + 

212

87.4

0.77

0.48, 1.22

0.72

0.45, 1.15

230

84.4

1.24

0.83, 1.86

1.34

0.87, 2.07

180

80.9

1.33

0.89, 1.98

1.35

0.88, 2.07

Ethnicity

 White

3394

91.2

1

 

1

 

3121

81.2

1

 

1

 

2945

74.8

1

 

1

 

 Mixed

74

83.9

0.50

0.26, 0.97

0.50

0.26, 0.98

80

70.8

0.56

0.32, 0.99

0.56

0.33, 0.96

73

65.9

0.65

0.40, 1.06

0.63

0.38, 1.03

 Asian

348

75.3

0.29

0.22, 0.39

0.28

0.21, 0.38

226

69.2

0.52

0.38, 0.71

0.55

0.39, 0.76

256

66.6

0.67

0.52, 0.87

0.67

0.51, 0.87

 Black

124

80.7

0.40

0.26, 0.62

0.43

0.26, 0.71

72

67.4

0.48

0.29, 0.81

0.55

0.32, 0.95

99

75.7

1.05

0.63, 1.75

0.98

0.59, 1.64

 Other

16

69.6

0.22

0.09, 0.55

0.20

0.08, 0.50

53

74.0

0.66

0.33, 1.32

0.52

0.26, 1.04

17

64.1

0.60

0.25, 1.47

0.63

0.26, 1.54

IMD

 1 (least advantaged)

726

82.3

0.39

0.29, 0.54

0.69

0.48, 0.98

524

71.4

0.47

0.36, 0.62

0.65

0.49, 0.88

493

71.0

0.81

0.63, 1.02

0.92

0.72, 1.18

 2

858

88.0

0.62

0.44, 0.86

0.99

0.69, 1.41

694

77.5

0.65

0.50, 0.85

0.88

0.66, 1.17

653

74.0

0.94

0.75, 1.18

1.05

0.83, 1.33

 3

843

91.2

0.88

0.62, 1.25

1.07

0.74, 1.54

773

82.0

0.87

0.67, 1.13

1.00

0.76, 1.31

719

74.1

0.94

0.75, 1.17

0.99

0.79, 1.25

 4

785

91.4

0.90

0.63, 1.29

1.01

0.69, 1.47

829

81.3

0.83

0.64, 1.07

0.87

0.66, 1.13

816

75.6

1.02

0.82, 1.27

1.01

0.81, 1.26

 5 (most advantaged)

823

92.2

1

 

1

 

832

84.1

1

 

1

 

757

75.2

1

 

1

 

Education

  < 17

661

86.4

0.69

0.52, 0.91

0.66

0.49, 0.90

375

74.4

0.70

0.53, 0.91

0.80

0.59, 1.09

353

69.4

0.72

0.57, 0.92

0.73

0.57, 0.94

 17–18

1056

86.4

0.68

0.54, 0.87

0.62

0.47, 0.81

820

76.3

0.77

0.63, 0.96

0.84

0.66, 1.06

889

71.4

0.80

0.67, 0.95

0.82

0.68, 0.99

 19 + 

2282

90.3

1

 

1

 

2426

80.6

1

 

1

 

2165

75.8

1

 

1

 

Lives with partner

 No

456

83.7

0.62

0.47, 0.81

0.77

0.56, 1.05

324

69.9

0.57

0.45, 0.74

0.80

0.59, 1.07

330

72.2

0.91

0.71, 1.16

0.95

0.73, 1.24

 Yes

3582

83.7

1

 

1

 

3328

80.2

1

 

1

 

3108

74.0

1

 

1

 

Parity

 Primiparous

1999

89.5

1.27

1.03, 1.58

1.24

0.98, 1.56

1926

81.1

1.34

1.12, 1.60

1.27

1.04, 1.54

1754

74.2

1.05

0.90, 1.23

1.04

0.86, 1.23

 Multiparous

1952

87.0

1

 

1

 

1663

76.2

1

 

1

 

1604

73.2

1

 

1

 
  1. 2014 survey data weighted by age, country of birth, registration status and IMD quintile
  2. 2018 survey data weighted by age, country of birth, registration status, IMD quintile, region of residence and parity
  3. 2020 survey data weighted by age, country of birth, registration status, IMD quintile, region of residence and parity
  4. aVariables mutually adjusted in the multivariable analysis