Skip to main content

Table 1 Background characteristics of the study participants for the whole sample and according to hearing status

From: Hearing loss and use of health services: a population-based cross-sectional study among Finnish older adults

 

All, N = 2144

No hearing loss (BEHL0.5–2kHz ≤ 40 dB), N = 1352

Hearing loss (BEHL0.5–2kHz > 40 dB), N = 328

 

Meana

SEa

Meana

SEa

Meana

SEa

p b

BEHL0.5–2kHz (dB), n = 1680

26

0.37

21

.25

52

1.0

<.001

Body mass index (kg/m2), n = 1867

27

0.12

28

.13

27

.30

.047

 

N

%a

N

%a

N

%a

p c

Male, n = 2144

766

39

515

39

108

45

.063

Language, n = 2144

      

.338

 Finnish

1739

87

1237

92

283

90

 

 Swedish

150

6.7

96

7.1

40

8.7

 

 Other

299

5.8

19

1.3

5

1.6

 

Lives alone, n = 1864

892

44

570

43

172

41

.648

Education, n = 1980

      

.029

 Highest

180

9.3

136

10

24

7.0

 

 Middle

329

17

247

18

37

14

 

 Lowest

1471

73

966

72

264

79

 

Income, n = 2144

      

.004

 Highest tertile

729

36

533

39

65

30

 

 Middle tertile

730

35

470

35

109

36

 

 Lowest tertile

729

29

349

26

154

34

 

Smoker, n = 1891

637

36

491

37

87

37

.999

Alcohol use ≥8 units/week, n = 1742

114

7.5

105

8.3

9

6.6

.489

Cardiovascular disease, n = 1985

1168

59

812

60

192

60

.990

Stroke, n = 1993

171

7.7

92

6.7

35

8.0

.427

Diabetes, n = 1996

256

12

159

12

52

15

.236

Arthritis, n = 1989

895

45

594

44

167

50

.067

Low vision, n = 1689

298

14

173

12

111

16

.034

Hearing aid user, n = 1975

118

5.1

12

0.8

94

33

<.001

  1. BEHL better ear hearing level threshold
  2. aWeighted and age-adjusted
  3. b p-value for comparison between Hearing loss and No hearing loss from linear regression analysis
  4. c p-value for comparison between Hearing loss and No hearing loss from logistic regression analysis