Skip to main content
. 2024 Mar 20;23:82. doi: 10.1186/s12944-024-02074-4

Table 4.

Multiple logistic regression of the association between AIP and gallstones

OR (95%CI), P value
Exposure Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4
AIP (Continuous) 1.61 (1.17, 2.20) 0.0032 2.27 (1.59, 3.23) <0.0001 1.55 (1.04, 2.31) 0.0318 1.57 (1.05, 2.35) 0.0283
AIP (Quartile)
Q1 [-0.959, -0.259) Reference Reference Reference Reference
Q2 [-0.259, -0.0588) 1.39 (1.01, 1.91) 0.0404 1.38 (1.00, 1.90) 0.0509 1.25 (0.90, 1.73) 0.1875 1.25 (0.90, 1.74) 0.1800
Q3 [-0.0588,0.165) 1.82 (1.35, 2.46) <0.0001 1.90 (1.39, 2.59) <0.0001 1.52 (1.09, 2.11) 0.0124 1.51 (1.08, 2.09) 0.0149
Q4 [0.165,1.39] 1.70 (1.26, 2.31) 0.0006 2.08 (1.50, 2.86) <0.0001 1.54 (1.09, 2.19) 0.0153 1.57 (1.10, 2.23) 0.0127
P for trend 2.03 (1.39, 2.98) 0.0003 2.76 (1.82, 4.17) <0.0001 1.81 (1.14, 2.86) 0.0118 1.84 (1.16, 2.92) 0.0100

AIP was converted from a continuous variable to a categorical variable (quartiles) in multiple logistic regression analyses.

OR: odds ratio; 95% Cl: 95% confidence interval

Model 1: no adjustment for covariates

Model 2: adjusted for sex, age, and race

Model 3: adjusted for sex, age, race, education level, marital status, PIR, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, fatty liver, smoking, alcohol consumption, TC, ALT, AST, and GGT

Model 4: adjusted for sex, age, race, education level, marital status, PIR, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, fatty liver, smoking, alcohol consumption, TC, ALT, AST, GGT, protein intake, carbohydrate intake, fat intake, water intake, calcium intake, iron intake, and zinc intake