Table 2.
Resultsa of multiple regression modeling.
| Regression coefficient vs. White (95% CI) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Black | Hispanic | Model R2 | |
| Lean Mass (kg) | |||
| Model 1c | 2.43 (1.12, 3.73)*** | 0.19 (-1.23, 1.60) | 0.3094 |
| Model 2d | 3.41 (2.39, 4.44)*** | 1.06 (-0.05, 2.16) | 0.5546 |
| Model 3e | 3.78 (2.78, 4.77)*** | 1.63 (0.40, 2.86)** | 0.6087 |
| Grip Strength (kg) b | |||
| Model 1c | 1.60 (-1.67, 4.86) | -1.06 (-3.92, 1.80) | 0.1306 |
| Model 2d | 1.75 (-1.57, 5.07) | -0.98 (-4.08, 2.11) | 0.1620 |
| Model 3e | 0.87 (-2.07, 3.81) | -0.90 (-3.64, 1.85) | 0.2781 |
| Composite Physical Function Score | |||
| Model 1c | -0.89 (-1.22, -0.56)*** | -0.94 (-1.41, -0.47)*** | 0.1600 |
| Model 2d | -0.85 (-1.20, -0.49)*** | -0.87 (-1.38, -0.35)*** | 0.2323 |
| Model 3e | -1.04 (-1.40, -0.68)*** | -0.79 (-1.25, -0.33)*** | 0.2671 |
| Lean Mass Index (kg/m2) g | |||
| Model 1c | 0.82 (0.40, 1.23)*** | 0.23 (-0.21, 0.67) | 0.0411 |
| Model 2d | 1.18 (0.86, 1.50) | 0.69 (0.33, 1.04)*** | 0.3630 |
| Model 3f | 1.25 (0.89, 1.61)*** | 0.70 (0.30, 1.10)*** | 0.3914 |
| Grip Strength/Arms Lean Mass | |||
| Model 1c | -0.54 (-0.91, -0.18)** | -0.50 (-0.87, -0.12)** | 0.0450 |
| Model 2d | -0.57 (-0.95, -0.20)** | -0.52 (-0.92, -0.13)** | 0.0686 |
| Model 3f | -0.23 (-0.59, 0.14) | -0.36 (-0.73, 0.01) | 0.1396 |
| Composite Physical Function Score/Legs Lean Mass | |||
| Model 1c | -0.058 (-0.077, -0.040)*** | -0.046 (-0.074, -0.019)** | 0.1499 |
| Model 2d | -0.060 (-0.079, -0.040)*** | -0.046 (-0.075, -0.016)** | 0.2567 |
| Model 3f | -0.052 (-0.071, -0.0327)*** | -0.0346 (-0.059, -0.010)** | 0.2783 |
a All estimates weighted according to Sampling Design (see Methods)
b Models including grip strength or grip strength/LM have N = 970. Other models, N = 1,147.
c Model 1: Controlled for age and height
d Model 2: Controlled for age, height, fat mass, self-rated health and physical activity
e Model 3: Controlled for age, height, fat mass, self-rated health and physical activity, plus maximum grip strength, the composite physical function score, or lean mass
f Model 3: Controlled for age, height, fat mass, self-rated health and physical activity, plus maximum grip strength/arms LM, composite physical function score/legs LM, or lean mass index
g Lean mass index models were not adjusted for height since height2 is the denominator of the outcome
* p < .05
** p < .01
*** p < .001