Table 3.
Sociodemographic, academic, lifestyle and behavioral data distributed according to nutritional status of undergraduate students at a university in southeastern Brazil in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, Vitória, 2020.
| Variables | Nutritional status (first year) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Underweight/Eutrophic | Overweight/Obese | p-value | Total | |
| N (%) | N (%) | N (%) | ||
| Sex | 0.017 | |||
| Male | 35 (22.3) | 34 (36.2) | 69 (27.5) | |
| Female | 122 (77.7) | 60 (63.8) | 182 (72.5) | |
| Marital status | <0.001 | |||
| Do not live maritally | 152 (98.7) | 70 (74.5) | 222 (88.4) | |
| Live maritally | 5 (1.3) | 24 (25.5) | 29 (11.6) | |
| Race/skin color 1 a | 0.515 | |||
| White | 72 (48) | 51 (54.2) | 123 (50.4) | |
| Black | 21 (14) | 10 (10.6) | 31 (12.7) | |
| Brown | 56 (37.3) | 31 (33) | 87 (35.6) | |
| Oriental/Indigenous | 1 (0.7) | 2 (2.2) | 3 (1.3) | |
| Education of the head of the family | 0.762 | |||
| Did not study/Primary complete | 44 (28) | 20 (21.3) | 64 (25.5) | |
| Secondary complete | 62 (39.5) | 39 (41.5) | 101 (40.2) | |
| Complete higher education/Post-graduate | 51 (32.5) | 35 (37.2) | 86 (34.3) | |
| Family income (minimum wage) 2 | 0.149 | |||
| ≤ 2 minimum wage | 74 (51.4) | 42 (46.1) | 116 (49.4) | |
| > 2 minimum wage | 70 (48.6) | 49 (53.9) | 119 (50.6) | |
| Graduation area | 0.017 | |||
| Health | 67 (42.7) | 26 (27.6) | 93 (37) | |
| No health | 90 (57.3) | 68 (72.4) | 158 (63) | |
| Alcohol use | 0.388 | |||
| No | 84 (53.5) | 45 (47.9) | 129 (51.4) | |
| Yes | 73 (46.5) | 49 (52.1) | 122 (48.6) | |
| Tobacco usea | 0.035 | |||
| No | 146 (93) | 93 (98.9) | 239 (95.2) | |
| Yes | 11 (7) | 1 (1.1) | 12 (4.8) | |
| Physical activity | 0.585 | |||
| No | 69 (44) | 38 (40.4) | 107 (42.6) | |
| Yes | 88 (66) | 56 (59.6) | 144 (57.4) | |
| Started cooking more | 0.008 | |||
| No | 30 (19.1) | 32 (34) | 62 (24.7) | |
| Yes | 127 (80.9) | 62 (66) | 189 (75.3) | |
| Ordered more food by delivery | 0.765 | |||
| No | 113 (72) | 66 (70.2) | 179 (71.3) | |
| Yes | 44 (28) | 28 (29.8) | 72 (28.7) | |
| Negative mood changes | 0.257 | |||
| No | 29 (18.5) | 23 (24.5) | 52 (20.7) | |
| Yes | 128 (81.5) | 71 (75.7) | 199 (79.3) | |
| Practice of restrictive diets | <0.001 | |||
| No | 111 (70.7) | 44 (46.8) | 155 (61.7) | |
| Yes | 46 (29.3) | 50 (53.2) | 96 (38.3) | |
| Concern about weight gain | <0.001 | |||
| No | 80 (51) | 14 (14.9) | 94 (37.5) | |
| Yes | 77 (49) | 80 (85.1) | 157 (62.5) | |
| Body perception | 0.010 | |||
| Adequate | 28 (17.8) | 6 (6.4) | 34 (13.5) | |
| Inadequate | 129 (82.2) | 88 (93.6) | 217 (86.5) | |
| Body dissatisfaction | <0.001 | |||
| No | 28 (17.8) | 3 (3.2) | 31 (12.4) | |
| Yes | 129 (82.2) | 91 (96.8) | 220 (87.6) | |
| Intuitive eating – total score b | 3.42 ± 0.59 | 3.23 ± 0.55 | 0.013 | |
| Intuitive eating – UPE subscale c * | 3.83 ± 0.84 | 3.58 ± 0.83 | 0.010 | |
| Intuitive eating – EPR subscale c * | 3.25 ± 1.37 | 3.06 ± 1.37 | 0.137 | |
| Intuitive eating – RHSC subscale c * | 3.33 ± 1.16 | 3.25 ± 1.08 | 0.380 | |
| Intuitive eating – B-FCC subscale c * | 3.67 ± 1.16 | 3.33 ± 1.33 | 0.072 | |
Chi-square test. aFisher’s exact test. bStudent t-test. cMann-Whitney test. *Data expressed as p50 ± interquartile range. In bold: statistically significant difference (p < 0.05). N = 251. 1N = 244. 2N = 235. B-FCC: body-food choice congruence. EPR: eating for physical rather than emotional reasons. RHSC: reliance on hunger and satiety cues. UPE: unconditional permission to eat.