Table 5

Associations between perception of safety and self-reported physical health status, controlling for recorded crime among men and women living in New Zealand (2010–2011)

Overall β (95% CI)Men β (95% CI)Women β (95% CI)
Neighbourhood perceived as unsafe−1.00 (−1.51 to −0.49)−1.31 (−2.18 to −0.44)−0.86 (−1.49 to −0.23)
 With total crime−0.97 (−1.48 to −0.45)−1.30 (−2.17 to −0.43)−0.80 (−1.43 to −0.17)
 With violent crime−0.95 (−1.46 to −0.43)−1.32 (−2.19 to −0.44)−0.77 (−1.40 to −0.13)
 With property crime−0.99 (−1.50 to −0.47)−1.33 (−2.20 to −0.46)−0.82 (−1.45 to −0.18)
 With dishonesty crime−0.99 (−1.50 to −0.48)−1.31 (−2.18 to −0.44)−0.82 (−1.46 to −0.19)
 With drug and antisocial crime−1.03 (−1.54 to −0.52)−1.35 (−2.22 to −0.48)−0.88 (−1.50 to −0.25)
 With crime with a weapon−1.03 (−1.54 to −0.51)−1.36 (−2.23 to −0.48)−0.87 (−1.50 to −0.24)
 With crime at night−0.97 (−1.48 to −0.46)−1.34 (−2.22 to −0.47)−0.78 (−1.41 to −0.15)
  • Coefficients and 95% CIs from cluster robust linear models predicting the physical health index are shown, and coefficients can be interpreted as the predicted difference in physical health status (as measured by the SF-12 transformed physical component score) for comparing those reporting their neighbourhood as unsafe for walking at night versus safe for walking at night; covariates include age, ethnicity, place of birth, education, employment, income and smoking status; crime rates were added one at a time to adjusted models and the coefficients for perceiving neighbourhood as unsafe are shown before and after adjustment for each of these crime rates; italic face is used to indicate statistical significance (p<0.05).