Table 3.

Linear regression models: Associations of dietary intakes and BMI with nutrition- and health-related psychosocial factors (NHRPF)^ˆ

	Model 1		Model 2		Model 3		Model 4		Model 5		Model 6
Key predictor	Better NHRPFξ		Better NKB¶		Nutrition importance§		Food choice∫		Awarenessφ		Intention to improve dietϐ
Outcomes	β	SE	β	SE	β	SE	β	SE	β	SE	β	SE
Dietary intakes
HEI	2.75	0.6 ***	3.71	0.64 ***	4.37	0.40 ***	0.67	0.50	2.66	0.63 ***	-2.76	0.49 ***
Energy (kcal/d)	-72.02	37	-57.33	53.27	-165.66	56.20 **	-139.95	44.28 **	19.47	29.95	76.40	52.60
Fat (% kcal)	-1.24	0.41 **	-1.51	0.39 ***	-1.66	0.28 ***	-0.79	0.29 *	-0.27	0.29	0.99	0.35 **
Cholesterol (mg/d)	-20.98	8.34 *	-12.96	12.13	-25.96	9.64 *	-14.35	8.30	-19.47	7.12 **	13.30	9.34
Sodium (mg/d)	-138.39	76.51	-90.39	113.21	-271.83	104.65 *	-228.72	79.64 **	-10.75	64.44	94.76	94.43
Calcium (mg/d)	20.90	18.82	27.84	24.19	-7.18	26.44	-44.22	22.93	35.73	18.43	11.25	26.75
Fiber (g/d)	1.42	0.48 **	1.84	0.46 ***	1.30	0.38 **	-0.27	0.36	2.18	0.36 ***	-1.16	0.40 **
Dairy product (g/d)	16.04	8.75	13.10	11.43	13.71	11.23	-20.23	10.94	9.55	9.89	-4.91	12.79
FV (g/d)	35.29	14.22 *	35.80	11.09 **	37.89	12.53 **	-6.51	15.05	57.54	11.85 ***	-50.76	13.44 ***
BMI (kg/m2)	-0.18	0.23	-0.26	0.24	-0.28	0.22	0.00	0.26	-0.07	0.21	1.01	0.21 ***

Abbreviation: NHRPF, nutrition- and health-related psychosocial factors; NKB, nutrition knowledge and beliefs; HEI, healthy eating index; FV, fruits and vegetables; BMI, body mass index.

^ˆEach model adjusted for survey year, sex, age, education, poverty income ratio, region, urbanization, comorbidity, and self-rated health.

Separate models were fit for each categorical exposure (e.g., better NKB) and continuous outcome (e.g., BMI) variables.

^ξBetter NHRPF was those with better nutrition knowledge and beliefs (NKB score≥median), more food choice consideration (score≥median), and more awareness of nutrition-related health risks.

^¶NKB: It consisted of 11 questions as ‘To you personally, is it very important (score: 4), somewhat important (3), not too important (score: 2), or not at all important (score: 1) to consume the following nutrients/foods at appropriate levels: salt/sodium, saturated fat, fiber, cholesterol, fruits and vegetables, sugar, dairy products, etc?’ (total score range: 11-44). Better NKB was defined as NKB score ≥80th percentile, while a score<80th percentile as reference.

^§Nutrition importance was assessed by asking participants: ‘When you buy food, how important is nutrition?’ Response ‘very important’ was categorized as ‘nutrition importance’ group, while subjects with other responses served as the reference group.

^∫Food choice: Subjects took considerations of 6 key factors affecting food choices, including food safety, nutrition, price, freshment, convenience, and taste (score range: 6-24). More food choice consideration was defined as a total score≥80th percentile, while a score<80th percentile served as the reference.

^φSubjects were categorized in the “awareness” group if they were aware of all 7 nutrition-related health risks (e.g., high fat, cholesterol, sodium; low fiber and calcium) vs. the other participants who were less aware of.

^ϐIntention to improve diet was assessed by asking subjects whether they thought about their current diet habits and would be willing to make changes: “The things that I eat and drink are healthy, and there is no reason for me to make changes.” (4-point Likert scale: strongly disagree, somewhat disagree, somewhat agree, and strongly agree. Those who answered “strongly disagree” or “somewhat disagree” were grouped as “intention to improve diet” and those reporting “strongly agree” or “somewhat agree” served as the reference group.

^*P<0.05;

^**P<0.01;

^***P<0.001.