Table 3.
Linear regression analysis between the association of demographic, clinical, and psychosocial factors and greater weight loss (n=206)
| Factor | Unadjusted | Adjusted | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Parameter Estimate (95% CI) | p-value | Parameter Estimate (95% CI) | p-value | |
| Age (10-unit increase) | 1.06 (0.27, 1.85) | 0.009 | 0.84 (0.02, 1.67) | 0.046 |
| White | 1.54 (0.15, 2.92) | 0.03 | 0.76 (−0.74, 2.26) | 0.32 |
| Female | −2.40 (−4.11, −0.68) | 0.006 | −1.34 (−3.06, 0.38) | 0.13 |
| Current tobacco user | 2.00 (−0.32, 4.33) | 0.09 | 1.74 (−0.53, 4.02) | 0.13 |
| Had ≥ 1 previous weight loss attempt | −2.26 (−4.52, 0.01) | 0.051 | −2.08 (−4.34, 0.19) | 0.072 |
| Presence of social support person | 2.31 (0.30, 4.32) | 0.02 | 2.17 (0.20, 4.14) | 0.031 |
| Favorable expectations about weight loss | −0.53 (−1.22, 0.16) | 0.13 | ||
| Self-efficacy to initiate diet | −0.84 (−2.50, 0.81) | 0.32 | ||
| Intentions to change diet | −0.26 (−1.13, 0.62) | 0.57 | ||
| Autonomous motivation for eating healthy | −0.03 (−1.00, 0.93) | 0.95 | ||
| Controlled motivation for eating healthy | 0.21 (−0.22, 0.64) | 0.35 | ||
| Self-efficacy to initiate physical activity | −0.05 (−1.38, 1.27) | 0.94 | ||
| Intentions to engage in physical activity | −0.32 (−0.86, 0.23) | 0.25 | ||
| Autonomous motivation for physical activity | −0.24 (−1.04, 0.55) | 0.55 | ||
| Controlled motivation for physical activity | 0.15 (−0.29, 0.59) | 0.50 | ||
95% CI indicates 95% confidence interval; all parameter estimates were combined across ten imputed datasets via PROC MIANALYZE. Positive regression coefficients indicate weight (kg) loss, whereas negative coefficients indicate weight gain. For example, in adjusted analyses, holding all else equal, patients with social support lost approximately 2.17 kilograms (95% CI: 0.20, 4.14) more than patients without social support. The multiple linear regression (adjusted) model included only those characteristics significant at the α < 0.10 level of significance in unadjusted analyses.