Table 3

Logistic regression results and marginal prevalence estimates for perceived need for care among Regular and Reserve Force members with an Afghanistan deployment and an identified mental disorder

InformationMedicationCounsellingAny
Perceived need for care (OR (95% CI))‡
 Model 1: unadjusted
 ResF versus RegF0.81* (0.64 to 1.04)0.48† (0.38 to 0.62)0.65† (0.50 to 0.84)0.60† (0.45 to 0.79)
 Model 2: adding covariates for military and sociodemographic characteristics
 ResF versus RegF1.04 (0.79 to 1.37)0.60† (0.46 to 0.79)0.8 (0.60 to 1.07)0.78 (0.57 to 1.07)
 Model 3: adding covariates for mental health
 ResF versus RegF1.14 (0.85 to 1.54)0.62† (0.46 to 0.84)0.82 (0.59 to 1.15)0.85 (0.58 to 1.23)
 Model 4: adding covariates for LTE and child abuse (as propensity score)
 ResF versus RegF1.16 (0.85 to 1.57)0.63† (0.46 to 0.86)0.87 (0.62 to 1.24)0.87 (0.59 to 1.29)
 Model 5: adding covariates for deployment associated mental health training
 ResF versus RegF1.18 (0.86 to 1.60)0.64† (0.47 to 0.87)0.88 (0.61 to 1.25)0.87 (0.59 to 1.30)
 Model 6: adding covariates for deployment-related characteristics and experiences‡
 ResF versus RegF1.11 (0.80 to 1.53)0.57† (0.41 to 0.80)0.83 (0.58 to 1.18)0.78 (0.52 to 1.19)
Perceived need for care: marginal prevalence estimates from the final logistic regression model (%, (95% CI))
 RegF46.6 (43.0 to 50.2)51.2 (47.8 to 54.6)72.5 (69.6 to 75.4)79.5 (76.7 to 82.2)
 ResF48.7 (43.2 to 54.2)40.7 (35.7 to 45.7)69.6 (65.2 to 74.0)76.3 (71.7 to 80.8)
 Marginal prevalence difference2.1 (−4.7 to 8.9)−10.5† (−16.7 to −4.4)−2.9 (−8.4 to 2.6)−3.2 (−8.8 to 2.4)
  • *Significant at 0.05<p≤0.10.

  • †Significant at p≤0.05.

  • ‡A variable-reduction strategy was used with each logistic regression. Four outcomes were assessed and the retained covariates were not necessarily the same for each outcome.

  • LTE, lifetime exposure to potentially traumatic experiences; RegF, regular force; ResF, reserve force.