Table 3.

Association between Household Composition and the Prevalence of Negative Weight Talk among 9–12 Year Old Children

	Parameter Estimates
	Single Parent Household (Ref: Dual Parent Household, n=45)	Sibling Composition (Ref: Sibling Category Absent)
Survey Item	Single Parent (n=15)	Older Brother (n = 43)	Older Sister (n = 36)	Younger Brother (n = 32)	Younger Sister (n = 31)
Any negative weight-based talk	−0.01 (−0.09, 0.08)	0.00 (−0.10, 0.10)ab	−0.05 (−0.14, 0.05)ab	−0.10 (−0.17, −0.03)†b	0.02 (−0.05, 0.10)a
Said you were fat	0.00 (−0.13, 0.13)	0.07 (−0.07, 0.21)a	−0.06 (−0.21, 0.08)ab	−0.10 (−0.21, 0.01)b	0.11 (−0.01, 0.22)a
Teased about the size or shape of body	0.06 (−0.06, 0.18)	0.15 (−0.02, 0.33)a	−0.16 (−0.32, 0.00)bc	−0.07 (−0.21, 0.07)ac	−0.05 (−0.19, 0.08)ac
Should go on diet	−0.07 (−0.16, 0.03)	−0.11 (−0.25, 0.03)a	0.03 (−0.09, 0.15)a	−0.07 (−0.15, 0.01)a	0.01 (−0.08, 0.10)a
Eat food that will make you fat	−0.09 (−0.24, 0.06)	−0.06 (−0.28, 0.17)ab	−0.03 (−0.23, 0.16)b	−0.27 (−0.42, −0.13)†a	0.05 (−0.11, 0.20)b
Would look better thinner	0.04 (−0.04, 0.12)	−0.03 (−0.09, 0.03)a	−0.02 (−0.07, 0.04)a	−0.01 (−0.04, 0.03)a	0.00 (−0.04, 0.05)a

^†Coefficient is significant at p <.05

1. Models are adjusted for: household composition, child overweight, and child sex

2. Sibling coefficients that do not share a superscript letter are significantly different at p <.05

3. Interpretation Example: The presence of a younger brother wasassociated with a −0.27 (95% CI: −0.42, −0.13) lower negative weight talk, prevalence proportion. Comparisons between siblings indicate that the effect of younger and older brother did not statistically differ (p > .05), but the younger brother effect was statistically different from older and younger sister (p < .05).