prev next front |1 |2 |3 |4 |5 |6 |7 |8 |9 |10 |11 |12 |13 |14 |15 |16 |17 |18 |19 |20 |21 |22 |23 |24 |25 |26 |27 |28 |29 |30 |31 |32 |33 |34 |35 |36 |37 |38 |39 |40 |41 |review
Model 1 provides the baseline for assessing the random variation of the intercept between level 2 areas and the fixed variation within the total sample at level 1. Variance at level 1 was substantially greater than at level 2 indicating that individuals differed more among themselves in this sample, than did urban areas from each other. The ICC for the null model was significant and equal to 0.008. This suggests that area heterogeneity was minimal and although only a small proportion of variance in individual physical health was due to structural context, it was nonetheless a significant independent predictor of physical health.