Table 4.
Odds ratios (95% CI) for quartiles of fitness | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
1st quartile | 2nd quartile | 3rd quartile | 4th quartile | |
MetS without fatness (TG + HOMA + BP − HDL) | 5.2 (3.8–7.2) | 2.0 (1.4–2.9) | 1.8 (1.2–2.6) | 1 (ref.) |
MetS with waist | 19.5 (10.8–35.1) | 3.7 (2.0–7.1) | 2.7 (1.4–5.3) | 1 (ref.) |
MetS with sum4skin | 30.0 (15.3–58.6) | 5.0 (2.4–10.3) | 3.2 (1.5–6.8) | 1 (ref.) |
MetS with BMI | 21.8 (12.2–39.3) | 4.8 (2.5–9.0) | 2.7 (1.4–5.2) | 1 (ref.) |
MetS with bioimpedance (%fat)∗ | 11.7 (5.2–26.6) | 2.2 (0.8–5.6) | 1.0 (0.3–3.0) | 1 (ref.) |
MetS with waist circumference∗ | 10.9 (4.2–28.4) | 2.3 (0.8–6.9) | 1.6 (0.5–5.2) | 1 (ref.) |
| ||||
MetS with HOMA | 19.5 (10.8–35.1) | 3.7 (2.0–7.1) | 2.7 (1.4–5.3) | 1 (ref.) |
MetS with glucose | 13.0 (7.7–21.8) | 2.3 (1.3–4.3) | 1.2 (0.6–2.4) | 1 (ref.) |
| ||||
MetS (TG + HOMA + sysBP + waist − HDL) | 18.3 (7.8–43.3) | 3.2 (1.2–8.6) | 2.6 (1.0–7.1) | 1 (ref.) |
Adding leptin | 75.2 (18.2–309.8) | 7.6 (1.6–35.4) | 5.2 (1.1–25.0) | 1 (ref.) |
| ||||
MetS (TG + HOMA + sysBP + waist − HDL) | 22.7 (10.8–47.7) | 3.1 (1.3–7.5) | 2.3 (0.9–5.6) | 1 (ref.) |
Adding APOA1 | 19.8 (9.8–40.1) | 2.8 (1.2–6.4) | 2.0 (0.8–4.8) | 1 (ref.) |
Adding APOB | 24.3 (10.4–56.7) | 4.5 (1.7–11.6) | 2.5 (0.9–7.0) | 1 (ref.) |
Adding adiponectin | 13.5 (6.5–27.9) | 1.9 (0.8–4.9) | 2.0 (0.8–4.7) | 1 (ref.) |
Adding CRP | 12.7 (7.4–21.7) | 2.8 (1.5–5.3) | 1.8 (1.0–3.5) | 1 (ref.) |
| ||||
MetS (TG + HOMA + BP − HDL) against CRF quartiles# | 5.2 (3.8–7.2) | 2.0 (1.4–2.9) | 1.8 (1.2–2.6) | 1 (ref.) |
MetS (TG + HOMA + BP − HDL) against waist quartiles# | 1 (ref.) | 1.1 (0.8–1.6) | 1.2 (0.9–1.7) | 4.1 (3.1–5.4) |
Adding CRF against waist quartiles | 1 (ref.) | 1.8 (1.1–3.0) | 2.5 (1.5–4.1) | 14.8 (9.6–22.9) |
#These two analyses compare the strength between quartiles of fitness and quartiles of waist circumference against the same MetS outcome.
∗Data only available in CoSCIS, which is why estimates of quartiles of fitness in relation to MetS including waist circumference differ from analysis above.