Table 2.
Overweight N = 564 (31.0%) | |||
---|---|---|---|
N | % | Adjusted OR (95% C.I)† |
|
Residential density | |||
Low | 382 | 67.7 | 1.06 (0.83- 1.37) |
High | 182 | 32.3 | 1.00 |
Access to commercial places | |||
Disagree | 189 | 33.5 | 1.49 (1.02- 2.18)* |
Agree | 375 | 66.5 | 1.00 |
Access to non-residential places | |||
Disagree | 92 | 16.3 | 1.02 (0.74- 1.39) |
Agree | 472 | 83.7 | 1.00 |
Access to public transport | |||
Disagree | 119 | 21.0 | 1.01 (0.74- 1.40) |
Agree | 445 | 79.0 | 1.00 |
Presence of recreational centers | |||
Disagree | 159 | 28.2 | 0.96 (0.68- 1.35) |
Agree | 405 | 71.8 | 1.00 |
Presence of pedestrian pathways | |||
Disagree | 167 | 29.6 | 1.17 (0.85- 1.62) |
Agree | 397 | 70.4 | 1.00 |
Maintenance of pathways | |||
Poor | 93 | 16.5 | 1.18 (0.77- 1.79) |
Good | 471 | 83.5 | 1.00 |
Presence of beautiful things | |||
Disagree | 230 | 40.8 | 1.58 (1.16- 2.09)* |
Agree | 334 | 59.2 | 1.00 |
Absence of unattended animals | |||
Disagree | 337 | 67.0 | 1.19 (0.89- 1.59) |
Agree | 186 | 33.0 | 1.00 |
Absence of garbages and foul odors | |||
Disagree | 259 | 45.9 | 1.41 (1.05- 1.89)* |
Agree | 305 | 54.1 | 1.00 |
Seeing people active | |||
Disagree | 79 | 14.0 | 0.75 (0.52- 1.09) |
Agree | 485 | 86.0 | 1.00 |
Connectivity of street | |||
Poor | 82 | 14.5 | 0.78 (0.55- 1.10) |
Good | 482 | 85.5 | 1.00 |
Traffic safety for bicycling | |||
Not safe | 132 | 23.4 | 1.29 (0.90- 1.87) |
Safe | 432 | 76.6 | 1.00 |
Traffic safety for walking | |||
Not safe | 171 | 30.3 | 1.56 (1.17- 2.07)* |
Safe | 393 | 69.7 | 1.00 |
Crime Safety during the day | |||
Not safe | 114 | 20.2 | 0.91 (0.66- 1.27) |
Safe | 450 | 79.8 | 1.00 |
Crime safety at night | |||
Not safe | 245 | 43.3 | 1.47 (1.13- 1.91)* |
Safe | 319 | 56.6 | 1.00 |
CI indicates confidence intervals; and OR, odds ratio
† Adjusted for age, gender, neighborhood location, marital status, ethnic group, employment status, and educational level
* P < 0.05