Skip to main content

Table 6 The multinomial logistic regression analysis of sociodemographic factors on different categories of expectations and acceptability of smart nursing homes

From: The expectations and acceptability of a smart nursing home model among Chinese older adults: a mixed methods study

Level of expectationsa

Variables

Subgroups of variables

B

Std. Error

Wald

Sig.

OR

95% Confidence Interval for Exp(B) (Lower -upper bound)

Middle tertile of expectations (mean: 3.91–4.40)

Health status

Two or more chronic diseases

0.661

0.459

2.071

0.150

1.936

0.787

4.762

One chronic disease

0.287

0.379

0.573

0.449

1.332

0.634

2.800

Healthy (reference group)

0b

.

.

.

.

.

.

Type of insurance

UEBMIc

-0.436

0.581

0.562

0.453

0.647

0.207

2.021

URBMId

-1.895

0.786

5.814

0.016

0.150

0.032

0.701

Other commercial insurance

-0.983

0.833

1.392

0.238

0.374

0.073

1.915

No insurance or with NRCMIe

(reference group)

0b

.

.

.

.

.

.

Familiar with technology

Familiar with technology

-1.453

0.637

5.204

0.023

0.234

0.067

0.815

Neutral

-1.001

0.481

4.326

0.038

0.368

0.143

0.944

Not familiar with technology (reference group)

0b

.

.

.

.

.

.

Openness to technology

Yes

0.027

0.501

0.003

0.957

1.028

0.385

2.742

No

(reference group)

0b

.

.

.

.

.

.

Self-efficacy in applying smart technologies

Yes

2.272

0.504

20.353

< 0.001

9.694

3.613

26.007

No

(reference group)

0b

.

.

.

.

.

.

Willingness to move to a nursing home

Yes

0.735

0.377

3.787

0.052

2.085

0.995

4.369

No

(reference group)

0b

.

.

.

.

.

.

Highest tertile of expectations (mean: >4.41)

Health status

Two or more chronic diseases

0.216

0.575

0.141

0.707

1.241

0.402

3.834

One chronic disease

− 0.046

0.463

0.010

0.921

0.955

0.385

2.366

Healthy (reference group)

0b

.

.

.

.

.

.

Type of insurance

UEBMI

0.013

0.981

0.000

0.989

1.013

0.148

6.931

URBMI

-0.545

1.090

0.251

0.617

0.580

0.068

4.905

Other commercial insurance

0.959

1.123

0.729

0.393

2.609

0.289

23.591

No insurance or with NRCMI

(reference group)

0b

.

.

.

.

.

.

Familiar with technology

Familiar with technology

-1.336

0.934

2.046

0.153

0.263

0.042

1.640

Neutral

-0.393

0.820

0.230

0.631

0.675

0.135

3.363

Not familiar with technology (reference group)

0b

.

.

.

.

.

.

Openness to technology

Yes

1.250

0.947

1.742

0.187

3.491

0.545

22.351

No

(reference group)

0b

.

.

.

.

.

.

Self-efficacy of in applying smart technologies

Yes

3.333

0.793

17.645

< 0.001

28.015

5.916

132.661

No

(reference group)

0b

.

.

.

.

.

.

Willingness to move to a nursing home

Yes

1.090

0.528

4.265

0.039

2.975

1.057

8.374

No

(reference group)

0b

.

.

.

.

.

.

Level of acceptabilityf

  

B

Std. Error

Wald

Sig.

OR

95% Confidence Interval for Exp(B)

Moderate tertile of acceptability (mean: 3.94–4.29)

Health status

Two or more chronic diseases

0.616

0.459

1.796

0.180

1.851

0.752

4.553

One chronic disease

0.064

0.387

0.028

0.868

1.066

0.499

2.277

Healthy (reference group)

0b

.

.

.

.

.

.

Number of children

3 or more than 3 children

-0.517

0.742

0.486

0.486

0.596

0.139

2.555

2 Children

0.278

0.372

0.558

0.455

1.321

0.637

2.741

1 Child or no child (reference group)

0b

.

.

.

.

.

.

Familiar with technology

Familiar with technology

-1.214

0.648

3.514

0.061

0.297

0.083

1.057

Neutral

-0.783

0.493

2.525

0.112

0.457

0.174

1.201

Not familiar with technology (reference group)

0b

.

.

.

.

.

.

Openness to technology

Yes

0.508

0.513

0.981

0.322

1.661

0.608

4.538

No

(reference group)

0b

.

.

.

.

.

.

Self-efficacy in applying smart technologies

Yes

1.759

0.498

12.495

< 0.001

5.808

2.190

15.406

No

(reference group)

0b

.

.

.

.

.

.

Willingness to move to a nursing home

Yes

0.710

0.387

3.377

0.066

2.035

0.954

4.341

No

(reference group)

0b

.

.

.

.

.

.

Highest tertile of acceptability (mean: >4.30)

Health status

Two or more chronic diseases

0.797

0.510

2.444

0.118

2.218

0.817

6.022

One chronic disease

0.308

0.411

0.564

0.453

1.361

0.609

3.043

Healthy (reference group)

0b

.

.

.

.

.

.

Number of children

3 or more than 3 children

-0.309

0.740

0.174

0.676

0.734

0.172

3.133

2 Children

-0.329

0.417

0.621

0.431

0.720

0.318

1.631

1 Child or no child (reference group)

0b

.

.

.

.

.

.

Familiar with technology

Familiar with technology

-1.010

0.733

1.900

0.168

0.364

0.087

1.532

Neutral

-0.405

0.604

0.449

0.503

0.667

0.204

2.179

Not familiar with technology (reference group)

0b

.

.

.

.

.

.

Openness to technology

Yes

0.566

0.635

0.795

0.373

1.761

0.508

6.109

No

(reference group)

0b

.

.

.

.

.

.

Self-efficacy in applying smart technologies

Yes

2.625

0.591

19.721

< 0.001

13.801

4.333

43.954

No

(reference group)

0b

.

.

.

.

.

.

Willingness to move to a nursing home

Yes

0.617

0.430

2.060

0.151

1.853

0.798

4.300

No

(reference group)

0b

.

.

.

.

.

.

  1. aThe reference category is the ‘lowest tertile of expectation (mean: ≤ 3.90)’
  2. b 0 This parameter is set to zero because it is redundant
  3. c UEBMI Urban employee basic medical insurance
  4. d URBMI Urban resident medical insurance
  5. e NRCMI The new rural cooperative medical insurance
  6. fThe reference category is the ‘lowest tertile of acceptability (mean: ≤ 3.93)’
Back to article page

BMC Nursing

ISSN: 1472-6955

Contact us