Skip to main content
. 2016 Aug 26;2(4):355–365. doi: 10.1002/osp4.58

Table 3.

Unadjusted and Adjusted Odds of Failure to Initiate a Weight Loss Program by Demographic, Clinical, and Psychosocial Factors, Overall and within Subset Having a Support Person

Characteristic All participants (n = 573) Subset of participants with support person (n = 489)
Unadjusted Odds Ratio (95% Confidence Interval) Adjusted Odds Ratio (95% Confidence Interval)a Unadjusted Odds Ratio (95% Confidence Interval) Adjusted Odds Ratio (95% Confidence Interval)a
Age (10‐unit increase) 0.71 (0.57, 0.90) 0.74 (0.57, 0.96) 0.65 (0.50, 0.84) 0.73 (0.54, 0.99)
Weight (kg) at in‐person screen (Week ‐17) 1.00 (0.99, 1.01) 1.00 (0.99, 1.02)
Non‐white vs. White 1.35 (0.81, 2.27) 1.09 (0.60, 1.96)
Female 2.19 (1.28, 3.75) 1.65 (0.91, 2.98) 2.84 (1.53, 5.24) 2.19 (1.10, 4.39)
< High School Graduate vs High School Graduate 1.66 (0.35, 7.87) 1.99 (0.42, 9.46)
Current tobacco user 0.60 (0.29, 1.25) 0.62 (0.26, 1.47)
Past weight loss attempted 1.11 (0.59, 2.08) 0.70 (0.31, 1.62)
Lack of support person 2.43 (1.34, 4.42) 2.37 (1.28, 4.38) n/a n/a
Favorable expectations about weight loss 1.05 (0.81, 1.36) 0.97 (0.72, 1.31)
Self‐efficacy to initiate diet 0.94 (0.51, 1.75) 1.10 (0.54, 2.24)
Intentions to change diet 0.87 (0.66, 1.15) 0.87 (0.62, 1.20)
Autonomous motivation for eating healthy 0.88 (0.61, 1.27) 0.82 (0.55, 1.23)
Controlled motivation for eating healthy 0.91 (0.77, 1.08) 0.87 (0.72, 1.05)
Encouragement for making dietary changesb n/a 0.94 (0.89, 0.99) 0.94 (0.89, 1.00)
Discouragement for making dietary changesb n/a 1.02 (0.95, 1.09)
Self‐efficacy to initiate physical activity 1.10 (0.65, 1.87) 1.18(0.64, 2.18)
Intentions to engage in physical activity 0.92 (0.76, 1.13) 0.93 (0.74, 1.18)
Autonomous motivation for physical activity 1.06 (0.76, 1.48) 1.07 (0.73, 1.56)
Controlled motivation for physical activity 0.92 (0.79, 1.13) 0.87 (0.72, 1.05)
Participation in physical activityb n/a 1.00 (0.97, 1.02)
a

Adjusted model included only those characteristics significant at the α = 0.05 level of significance in unadjusted analyses.

b

These measures were assessed only among the subset of n = 489 participants who responded that they had a support person.