Table 2.

Proportional change (95% CI) in screen time according to objective and perceived environmental attributes at baseline (n=1011)

	Model 1			Model 2
	Exp(β)	95% CI	P value	Exp(β)	95% CI	P value
Perceived
Residential density (high)	1.02	0.91 to 1.14	0.69	1.02	0.93 to 1.13	0.66
Access to destination (good)	1.10	0.99 to 1.22	0.06	1.12	1.02 to 1.23	0.02*
Access to public transportation (good)	1.20	1.03 to 1.39	0.01*	1.18	1.04 to 1.36	0.01*
Sidewalk (yes)	1.04	0.94 to 1.15	0.43	1.06	0.97 to 1.17	0.20
Street connectivity (good)	1.10	0.99 to 1.23	0.08	1.11	1.01 to 1.23*	0.04*
GIS
Residential density (high)	0.96	0.87 to 1.06	0.45	0.96	0.87 to 1.06	0.44
Access to destination (good)	1.07	0.96 to 1.18	0.21	1.05	0.96 to 1.16	0.29
Access to public transportation (good)	1.13	1.03 to 1.25	0.01*	1.11	1.01 to 1.22	0.03*
Sidewalk (yes)	0.99	0.89 to 1.10	0.88	0.99	0.91 to 1.10	0.98
Street connectivity (good)	0.97	0.88 to 1.08	0.60	1.00	0.91 to 1.11	0.95

Generalised linear model (specifying a gamma distribution and using a log link).

Model 1: unadjusted model; model 2: adjusted for gender, age, marital status, education attainment, household income, employment status, car ownership status, BMI, physical function and MVPA at baseline.

Results of each model are reported as antilogarithms of the regression coefficients (and their respective 95% CI). Coefficients less than 1 denote proportionally less time spent in screen time, whereas coefficients more than 1 denote proportionally more time spent in screen time, relative to the reference category.

*P<0.05.

BMI, body mass index; GIS, geographic information system; MVPA, moderate-to-vigorous physical activity.