Skip to main content
. 2017 Jul 11;25(1):30–37. doi: 10.1007/s12529-017-9670-3

Table 3.

Predictive value of participant characteristics of the three-profile model

Total sample Eliminated in step
(lowest
p value)
Average compared to sedentarya Active compared to sedentarya Active compared to averagea
Age (years) 55.8 (10.2) −0.070 (.001) −.047 (.105) −0.024 (.372)
Sex (male) 28% 2 (.698)
Education (≥ college degree) 52.9% 3 (.581)
Work status (> 8 h/week) 53.8% 6 (.423)
Body mass index (kg/m2) (N = 154) 26.4 (5.1) 9 (.061)
Weeks since last treatmentb 206 (236) 7 (.248)
Comorbid conditions (≥ 2) 14.0% 4 (.465)
Limitations by comorbid condition (≥ 3/4) 37.8% 1.496 (.002) 1.48 (.011) 0.015 (.977)
Limitations by pain (≥ 4/7) 32.8% −0.923 (.046) −1.959 (.006) 1.035 (.136)
Treatment: chemo 69.6% 8 (.27)
Treatment: radiotherapy 59.7% 1 (.717)
Treatment: stem cell transplant 6.4% 0c
Fatigue (8–56) 42.0 (8.0) 11 (.010)
Distress (0–42) 14.3 (6.8) 5 (.474)
Work ability (0–10) 3.2 (1.7) 10 (.035)

aValues are reported as logodds (p value). Logodds > 0 indicate that the risk of the outcome falling in the comparison profile relative to the risk of the outcome falling in the referent profile increases as the variable increases. Univariate results are presented in the Supplementary Materials (T5)

bMedian: 126 weeks

cIn the active profile, only one participant had experienced a stem cell transplant; therefore, this factor was excluded from the analyses