Table 3.

Adjusted OR and 95 % CI for healthy eating markers prevalence in high and medium categories of economic residential segregation; MOVE-se Academias study, Belo Horizonte, Brazil, 2014–2015

	Regular consumption of fruit			Regular consumption of vegetables			Regular consumption of beans			Regular consumption of fish
	OR	95 % CI	P value	OR	95 % CI	P value	OR	95 % CI	P value	OR	95 % CI	P value
Unadjusted
High	0·59	0·40, 0·88	0·009	0·43	0·26, 0·70	0·001	2·00	1·17, 3·41	0·011	0·58	0·39, 0·87	0·008
Medium	0·57	0·41, 0·81	0·002	0·48	0·30, 0·75	0·001	1·19	0·77, 1·83	0·428	0·57	0·41, 0·81	0·002
Low	1·00	Ref.	–	1·00	Ref.	–	1·00	Ref.	–	1·00	Ref.	–
Model 1
High	0·68	0·45, 1·03	0·068	0·49	0·31, 0·79	0·004	2·02	1·18, 3·48	0·010	0·63	0·42, 0·94	0·025
Medium	0·62	0·43, 0·89	0·009	0·54	0·35, 0·84	0·006	1·23	0·79, 1·90	0·353	0·60	0·42, 0·85	0·005
Low	1·00	Ref.	–	1·00	Ref.	–	1·00	v		1·00	Ref.	–
Model 2
High	0·84	0·55, 1·28	0·426	0·60	0·37, 0.96	0·034	1·84	1·07, 3·18	0·026	0·72	0·48, 1·10	0·136
Medium	0·70	0·49, 1·01	0·059	0·64	0·42, 0·98	0·040	1·23	0·79, 1·91	0·351	0·66	0·46, 0·94	0·024
Low	1·00	Ref.	–	1·00	Ref.	–	1·0	Ref.	–	1·00	Ref.	–
Model 3
High	0·86	0·56, 1·32	0·492	0·61	0·39, 0·99	0·044	1·82	1·06, 3·12	0·030	0·74	0·49, 1·12	0·159
Medium	0·71	0·49, 1·03	0·075	0·63	0·42, 0·97	0·038	1·23	0·79, 1·90	0·353	0·65	0·46, 0·94	0·022
Low	1·00	Ref.	–	1·00	Ref.	–	1·00	Ref.	–	1·00	Ref.	–
Model 4
High	0·84	0·55, 1·30	0·443	0·62	0·39, 0·98	0·043	1·85	1·07, 3·19	0·026	0·73	0·48, 1·10	0·141
Medium	0.71	0·49, 1·03	0·071	0·64	0·42, 0·97	0·038	1·23	0·79, 1·91	0·344	0·65	0·45, 0·94	0·020
Low	1·00	Ref.	–	1·00	Ref.	–	1·00	Ref.	–	1·00	Ref.	–

Ref., reference category.

Logistic regression models using the generalized estimating equations method were used to estimate adjusted OR and 95 % CI. Residential segregation was included in models as a categorical variable with ‘low’ residential segregation as the reference category (high, ; medium: ; and low, ). Regular consumption defined as a consumption of any amount for five days or more per week, except for fish (one or more days per week). Low perceived food environments were considered when the answers to all questions about fruit and vegetable availability (variety, quality and price) were ‘no’.

Model 1: adjusted for age, gender and skin colour.

Model 2: Model 1 + family income and education.

Model 3: Model 2 + self-rated health and BMI (kg/m²).

Model 4: Model 3 + low perceived food environment.

Bold denotes statistical significance, P < 0·05.