Table 3.
Model 1 (⊿BMI> = 2.5 kg/m2) | Model 2 (⊿BMI> = 3.5 kg/m2) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ORsa | 95% CIsa | p for trendb | ORsa | 95% CIsa | p for trendb | |
Marital status | ||||||
Unmarried | 0.77 | (0.52–1.14) | 0.79 | (0.51–1.22) | ||
Married | 1.00 | (Ref) | 1.00 | (Ref) | ||
Bereavement/Divorce | 1.10 | (0.74–1.65) | 0.835 | 1.27 | (0.82–1.98) | 0.311 |
Family structure | ||||||
Single | 1.03 | (0.68–1.56) | 1.37 | (0.88–2.15) | ||
Couple | 1.11 | (0.86–1.43) | 0.99 | (0.74–1.32) | ||
Two generations | 1.00 | (Ref) | 1.00 | (Ref) | ||
Three generations | 1.13 | (0.90–1.41) | 0.776 | 1.14 | (0.89–1.48) | 0.934 |
Family relationships | ||||||
Good | 1.00 | (Ref) | 1.00 | (Ref) | ||
Somewhat good | 0.90 | (0.75–1.09) | 0.89 | (0.72–1.10) | ||
‘Not so good’/‘Not good’ | 0.55 | (0.19–1.54) | 0.752 | 1.28 | (0.45–3.66) | 0.793 |
CIs confidence intervals, ORs odds ratios, Ref reference
aORs and CIs were adjusted for age, BMI and physical activity (as continuous variables for the three variables), smoking status (never, ex- and smokers = 0, 1 and 2), habitual drinking (never, ex- and drinkers = 0, 1 and 2), feeling stressed (many times, normal and rare = − 1, 0 and 1) and education level (< 12, 12 and ≥ 12 = 0, 1 and 2)
bTrend association was assessed by assigning ordinal numbers (− 1, 0 and 1) to unmarried, married and ‘bereavement/divorce’ for marital status, those (0, 1, 2 and 3) to single, couple, two generations and three generations for family structure, and then those (0, 1 and 2) to good, somewhat good and “not so good/not good” for family relationships, respectively