Table 3.
Weighted logistic regression analysis of the connection between METS-VF and HUA.
| aModel 1 | bModel 2 | cModel 3 | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Characteristic | OR | 95% CI | p-value | OR | 95% CI | p-value | OR | 95% CI | p-value |
| Before PSM | |||||||||
| Continuous | 3.39 | 2.96, 3.88 | <0.001 | 4.34 | 3.64, 5.17 | <0.001 | 3.51 | 2.88, 4.27 | <0.001 |
| dQuartile | |||||||||
| Q1 | Ref | Ref | Ref | ||||||
| Q2 | 2.19 | 1.68, 2.86 | <0.001 | 2.48 | 1.91, 3.23 | <0.001 | 2.18 | 1.65, 2.89 | <0.001 |
| Q3 | 4.19 | 3.26, 5.38 | <0.001 | 5.36 | 4.13, 6.96 | <0.001 | 4.32 | 3.24, 5.76 | <0.001 |
| Q4 | 6.37 | 5.08, 7.98 | <0.001 | 8.82 | 6.68, 11.6 | <0.001 | 6.07 | 4.39, 8.38 | <0.001 |
| P for trend | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | ||||||
| After PSM | |||||||||
| Continuous | 1.91 | 1.64, 2.23 | <0.001 | 2.48 | 2.05, 2.99 | <0.001 | 2.90 | 2.36, 3.58 | <0.01 |
| dQuartile | |||||||||
| Q1 | Ref | Ref | Ref | ||||||
| Q2 | 1.42 | 1.03, 1.97 | 0.033 | 1.57 | 1.15, 2.16 | 0.005 | 1.72 | 1.24, 2.37 | 0.001 |
| Q3 | 2.27 | 1.69, 3.04 | <0.001 | 2.74 | 2.03, 3.71 | <0.001 | 3.28 | 2.39, 4.50 | <0.001 |
| Q4 | 2.51 | 1.91, 3.29 | <0.001 | 3.64 | 2.62, 5.05 | <0.001 | 4.53 | 3.17, 6.46 | <0.001 |
| P for trend | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | ||||||
Model 1: adjusted for no covariates.
Model 2: adjusted for age, gender, and race.
Model 3: adjusted for age, gender, race, education level, marital status, PIR, smoking, alcohol consumption, hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, CKD, CVD, physical activity, diuretic use, energy intake, ALT, and AST.
METS-VF quartiles: Q1: ≤5.75, Q2: 5.75–6.26, Q3: 6.26–6.62, Q4: >6.62.
HUA: hyperuricemia, METS-VF: Metabolic Score for Visceral Fat, OR: odds ratio, CI: confidence interval, PSM: propensity score matching, PIR: income-to-poverty ratio, CKD: chronic kidney disease, CVD: cardiovascular disease, AST, aspartate aminotransferase; ALT, alanine aminotransferase, Q: quartile.