Table 2.

Expenditure (£/2000 kcal)^a as a predictor of healthiness of household food choices.

		Percent energy from less-healthy foods and beverages	Percent energy from fruit and vegetablesb
Model 1: Expenditure (+ control variables)	For 20% increase in expenditurec Coefficient: B (95% CIs)	0.7 percentage point decreased  − 9.32⁎⁎⁎ (− 10.10, − 8.54)	7.2% increased 0.38⁎⁎⁎ (0.34, 0.42)
Model 2: Model 1 + social class	For 20% increase in expenditure Coefficient: B (95% CIs)	0.7 percentage point decrease  − 8.92⁎⁎⁎ (− 9.73, − 8.11)	6.4% increase 0.34⁎⁎⁎ (0.30, 0.38)
Model 3: Model 2 + supermarket choice group	For 20% increase in expenditure Coefficient: B (95% CIs)	0.7 percentage point decrease  − 9.45⁎⁎⁎(− 10.31, − 8.59)	6.4% increase 0.34 ⁎⁎⁎ (0.30, 0.38)

All CI estimates were Bonferroni-corrected for multiple comparisons. Regressions controlled for age gender and ethnic group of main shopper; number of adults in household, number of children in household, and region of residence. Less-healthy foods and beverages were defined by FSA Nutrient Profile (28) scores for individual products (foods scoring 4 or more, and beverages 1 or more).

^aExpenditure was logged in analyses.

^bPercent energy from fruit and vegetables was logged in analyses.

^cA 20% increase in expenditure equates to an approximately £0.65 increase in spend per 2000 cal at the median value of expenditure (£3.24 per 2000 cal), and would move a household at the median value within each expenditure quintile into the quintile above.

^dBack-transformed from logged variables in analyses, from coefficient B:

– For less-healthy foods and beverages, calculated as: B*log(1.2)

– For fruit and vegetables, calculated as: 1.2^B.

^⁎⁎⁎p < 0.001.

Data from UK, 2010.