Table 3.
Multivariable logistic regression model for predictors of children's relatively positive PRH (N=303)
| Relatively positive PRH |
Relatively positive PRH |
Relatively positive PRH |
|||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BMI categorical¶ |
BMI continuous‡ |
WC continuous§ |
|||||
| OR | 95% CI | OR | 95% CI | OR | 95% CI | ||
| Child’s individual characteristics | |||||||
| BMI (IOTF), obese† vs overweight/normal | 5.48 | (1.43 to 21.03)* | |||||
| BMI, kg/m2 (continuous) | 0.73 | (0.58 to 0.93) | ** | ||||
| WC, cm (continuous) | 0.89 | (0.81 to 0.98)* | |||||
| Fats, g (quintiles), Q5† vs Q1–4 | 1.57 | (0.42 to 5.79) | 1.49 | (0.40 to 5.53) | 1.32 | (0.36 to 4.80) | |
| Top food group servings/day (quintiles), Q5† vs Q1–4 | 1.23 | (0.33 to 4.53) | 1.30 | (0.36 to 4.63) | 1.29 | (0.36 to 4.62) | |
| Fruits veg food group servings/day (quintiles), Q1† vs Q2–5 | 2.57 | (0.75 to 8.80) | 2.86 | (0.83 to 9.93) | 2.73 | (0.78 to 9.49) | |
| Family characteristics | |||||||
| Household weekly income, less† vs high | 1.85 | (0.63 to 5.40) | 1.76 | (0.59 to 5.21) | 1.79 | (0.61 to 5.26) | |
| Entitlement to general medical, card yes† vs no | 0.94 | (0.24 to 3.71) | 1.03 | (0.26 to 4.07) | 1.04 | (0.26 to 4.10) | |
| Fathers’ participation, no† vs yes | 1.88 | (0.68 to 5.21) | 1.86 | (0.67 to 5.16) | 2.06 | (0.74 to 5.71) | |
| Support from spouse/partner, less† vs more | 0.70 | (0.20 to 2.49) | 0.67 | (0.19 to 2.33) | 0.74 | (0.22 to 2.52) | |
| Support from parents, less† vs more | 1.92 | (0.53 to 6.93) | 2.33 | (0.64 to 8.42) | 2.37 | (0.66 to 8.53) | |
| Support from children, less† vs more | 1.15 | (0.38 to 3.45) | 1.29 | (0.42 to 3.91) | 1.25 | (0.41 to 3.82) | |
| Support from close relatives, less† vs more | 0.86 | (0.23 to 3.13) | 0.84 | (0.24 to 3.02) | 0.84 | (0.23 to 3.01) | |
| Maternal characteristics | |||||||
| Energy, kcal (quintiles), Q5† vs Q1–4 | 1.89 | (0.30 to 11.84) | 2.00 | (0.31 to 12.86) | 1.57 | (0.28 to 8.84) | |
| Fats, g (quintiles), Q5† vs Q1–4 | 0.72 | (0.09 to 5.54) | 0.59 | (0.07 to 4.77) | 0.92 | (0.13 to 6.41) | |
| Top food group servings/day (quintiles), Q5† vs Q1–4 | 1.08 | (0.29 to 3.94) | 1.30 | (0.36 to 4.65) | 1.18 | (0.32 to 4.34) | |
| Education, lower† vs third level | 1.34 | (0.47 to 3.78) | 1.35 | (0.48 to 3.80) | 1.48 | (0.53 to 4.13) | |
| Self-reported health status, Rel.Negative† vs Rel.Positive | 4.20 | (1.45 to 12.20)** | 4.42 | (1.53 to 12.79) | ** | 4.17 | (1.47 to 11.87)** |
| Paternal characteristics | |||||||
| Current smoking status, yes† vs no | 1.37 | (0.48 to 3.93) | 1.31 | (0.45 to 3.83) | 1.53 | (0.54 to 4.35) | |
| Education, lower† vs third level | 0.69 | (0.21 to 2.28) | 0.79 | (0.24 to 2.57) | 0.83 | (0.26 to 2.67) | |
| Employment, non-earning † vs self-employed | 1.60 | (0.73 to 3.53) | 1.52 | (0.69 to 3.32) | 1.57 | (0.70 to 3.53) | |
| Self-reported health status, Rel.Negative† vs Rel.Positive | 1.48 | (0.52 to 4.20) | 1.54 | (0.54 to 4.35) | 1.43 | (0.51 to 3.96) | |
*p<0.05 (2-tailed), **p<0.01 (2-tailed).
†Reference category (OR=1).
¶Child BMI as a categorical variable; model χ2 = 34.2, df = 21, p = 0.034; −2LL = 128.6, Nagelkerke R2 = 0.26.
‡Child BMI as a continuous variable; model χ2 = 35.9, df = 21, p = 0.022; −2LL = 126.9, Nagelkerke R2 = 0.27.
§Child WC as a continuous variable; model χ2 = 33.8, df = 21, p = 0.038; −2LL = 128.9, Nagelkerke R2 = 0.25.
BMI, body mass index; PRH, parent-rated health; Rel.Negative, relatively negative; Rel.Positive, relatively positive; WC, waist circumference.