Table 5.
Logistic regression analysis of the association between NACS implementation score/NACS status and odds of being overweight/obese.
| Outcome: Odds of being overweight/obese (BMI > 24.9 kg/m2) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| aOR (95% CI)a | aOR (95% CI)a | ||
| NACS implementation score | 0.90 (0.45, 1.80) | NACS status (Yes vs No) | 0.26 (0.05, 1.24) |
| Age (in years) | 1.06 (1.01, 1.12) | Age (in years) | 1.06 1.01, 1.12) |
| Time since HIV diagnosis (in years) | 1.06 (0.94, 1.20) | Time since HIV diagnosis (in years) | 1.06 (0.94, 1.20) |
| Sex (female vs male) | 1.87 (0.54, 6.53) | Sex (female vs male) | 1.87 (0.54, 6.52) |
| Monthly incomeb (Low vs High) | 0.31 (0.12, 0.82) | Monthly income2 (Low vs High) | 0.31 (0.12, 0.82) |
| Clinic 1 vs 6 | 0.80 (0.25, 2.58) | Clinic 1 vs 6 | 2.80 (0.57, 13.8) |
| Clinic 2 vs 6 | 4.49 (0.13, 17.73) | Clinic 2 vs 6 | 1.57 (0.28, 8.91) |
| Clinic 3 vs 6 | 0.19 (0.01, 4.27) | Clinic 3 vs 6 | 0.81 (0.20, 3.22) |
| Clinic 4 vs 6 | 0.70 (0.11, 4.62) | Clinic 4 vs 6 | 0.78 (0.18, 3.35) |
| C-statistic=0.78c | |||
| Hosmer & Lemeshow Goodness-of-Fit Test: chi-square=10.89, df=8 p=0.21 | |||
NACS, Nutrition Assessment Counseling and Support; OR, Odds Ratio.
a
Adjusted for NACS implementation score or NACS status, age, time from HIV diagnosis, sex and monthly income.
b
Low (0–299 GH Cedis) High (>300 GH Cedis).
c
C-statistic and Hosmer & Lemeshow Goodness-of-Fit Test for both models
*
No estimate produced for clinic 5 because it was set to 0, since it was a linear combination of other clinic variables