Skip to main content
. 2020 Mar 9;23(9):1473–1483. doi: 10.1017/S1368980019004026

Table 4.

Adjusted ORs for the characteristics of college students from a large university in south-eastern USA in October and November 2016 by food security status using the four-level food security variable

Marginal food security Low food security Very low food security
AOR 95 % CI AOR 95 % CI AOR 95 % CI
Age (years) 0·95*** 0·92, 0·97 0·98 0·96, 1·01 1·02 0·98, 1·07
Gender
 Female 1·00 Ref. 1·00 Ref. 1·00 Ref.
 Male 0·97 0·82, 1·16 1·18 0·98, 1·42 1·86** 1·28, 2·70
 Other 0·69 0·25, 1·93 1·21 0·49, 3·00 3·19 0·94, 10·77
Race/ethnicity
 White, non-Hispanic 1·00 Ref. 1·00 Ref. 1·00 Ref.
 Asian 0·83 0·65, 1·06 0·93 0·72, 1·21 1·41 0·87, 2·31
 Hispanic 1·63*** 1·23, 2·17 1·27 0·91, 1·76 1·71 0·89, 3·29
 African American 1·84*** 1·30, 2·62 3·04*** 2·18, 4·24 5·38*** 3·05, 9·52
 American Indian 2·47 0·92, 6·63 1·70 0·50, 5·78 5·10 0·59, 43·73
 Multiracial/other 1·09 0·75, 1·58 1·32 0·90, 1·93 1·77 0·85, 3·72
Marital status
 Not married 1·00 Ref. 1·00 Ref. 1·00 Ref.
 Married 0·93 0·71, 1·23 0·56*** 0·40, 0·78 0·25** 0·11, 0·59
Dependent children
 No 1·00 Ref. 1·00 Ref. 1·00 Ref.
 Yes 1·08 0·65, 1·81 2·38*** 1·44, 3·93 6·39*** 2·50, 16·34
Year in school
 Freshman 1·00 Ref. 1·00 Ref. 1·00 Ref.
 Sophomore 1·30 0·96, 1·75 1·77*** 1·30, 2·41 2·43* 1·22, 4·81
 Junior 1·70** 1·23, 2·36 1·62** 1·14, 2·30 2·61** 1·26, 5·41
 Senior 1·86*** 1·30, 2·66 1·59* 1·09, 2·33 2·00 0·91, 4·36
 Graduate 1·37 0·91, 2·07 0·86 0·55, 1·32 0·63 0·26, 1·55
 Other 1·44 0·43, 4·81 1·75 0·55, 5·57 1·97 0·19, 20·34
International student
 No 1·00 Ref. 1·00 Ref. 1·00 Ref.
 Yes 1·55* 1·10, 2·19 1·32 0·89, 1·94 2·51** 1·31, 4·80
Enrolment status
 Full-time 1·00 Ref. 1·00 Ref. 1·00 Ref.
 Part-time 0·66 0·44, 1·01 0·69 0·44, 1·08 0·50 0·18, 1·34
Residency
 Off-campus 1·00 Ref. 1·00 Ref. 1·00 Ref.
 On-campus 1·13 0·87, 1·47 1·08 0·81, 1·42 1·17 0·70, 1·96
Employment status
 Unemployed 1·00 Ref. 1·00 Ref. 1·00 Ref.
 ≥1 part-time jobs 1·27** 1·08, 1·50 1·63*** 1·36, 1·96 1·52* 1·03, 2·22
 Full-time job 1·13 0·85, 1·51 1·18 0·85, 1·64 1·21 0·58, 2·52
Have car
 No 1·00 Ref. 1·00 Ref. 1·00 Ref.
 Yes 0·94 0·77, 1·15 0·80* 0·64, 0·99 0·80 0·52, 1·22
Financial aid
 No 1·00 Ref. 1·00 Ref. 1·00 Ref.
 Yes 1·26** 1·07, 1·48 1·73*** 1·45, 2·08 2·16*** 1·44, 3·23
Perceived health rating
 Excellent 1·00 Ref. 1·00 Ref. 1·00 Ref.
 Good 1·98*** 1·67, 2·34 3·22*** 2·64, 3·94 6·59*** 3·62, 11·99
 Fair 3·20*** 2·39, 4·28 7·11*** 5·26, 9·62 34·08*** 17·49, 66·40
 Poor 1·53 0·54, 4·30 9·95*** 4·76, 20·79 101·67*** 36·73, 281·43
Weight status
 Underweight 1·14 0·75, 1·72 1·44 0·94, 2·21 1·09 0·45, 2·59
 Normal weight 1·00 Ref. 1·00 Ref. 1·00 Ref.
 Overweight 1·18 0·98, 1·42 1·07 0·88, 1·30 0·77 0·50, 1·17
 Obese 1·18 0·89, 1·55 0·92 0·68, 1·23 0·39** 0·21, 0·76
Cooking frequency
 Never 1·00 Ref. 1·00 Ref. 1·00 Ref.
 Sometimes 1·58*** 1·21, 2·06 1·57** 1·19, 2·09 2·62** 1·38, 4·98
 Often 1·54** 1·13, 2·11 1·69** 1·21, 2·36 3·14** 1·50, 6·56
Perceived cooking skills
 Poor 1·00 Ref. 1·00 Ref. 1·00 Ref.
 Fair 0·88 063, 1·24 0·69* 0·49, 0·98 0·47* 0·24, 0·92
 Good 0·90 0·64, 1·26 0·75 0·54, 1·06 0·60 0·31, 1·14
 Excellent 0·82 0·56, 1·19 0·79 0·54, 1·16 0·67 0·33, 1·39
Meal plan
 No 1·00 Ref. 1·00 Ref. 1·00 Ref.
 Yes 0·70** 0·53, 0·92 0·65** 0·49, 0·86 0·73 0·43, 1·26

AOR, adjusted OR.

*P < 0·05, **P < 0·01, ***P < 0·001.

Multinomial logistic regression was used with high food security as the reference group. Variables included in the models are age, gender, race/ethnicity, marital status, dependent children, year in school, international student, enrolment status, residency, employment status, have car, financial aid, perceived health rating, BMI, cooking frequency, perceived cooking skills and meal plan.