Skip to main content
. 2020 Apr 8;4(5):nzaa070. doi: 10.1093/cdn/nzaa070

TABLE 3.

Logistic regression for each biomarker risk outcome using multiple predictors1

Predictors
 Biomarkers Age, y Sex: male Ethnicity: Pehuenche Food insecurity UP foods MVPA Time meal
BFP “at-risk” 0.99 (0.96, 1.02) 0.69 (0.26, 1.90) 0.82 (0.29, 2.27) 1.99 (0.70, 5.74) 0.96 (0.88, 1.03) 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)
BMI “at-risk” 0.99 (0.96, 1.01) 0.42 (0.19, 0.93)* 1.02 (0.44, 2.37) 1.51 (0.64, 3.60) 1.00 (0.99, 1.00) 1.00 (1.00, −1.00)
WC “at-risk” 0.98 (0.95, 1.00) 0.089 (0.04, 0.19)* 1.01 (0.44, 2.34) 0.96 (0.39, 2.34) 0.98 (0.92, 1.05) 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)
SBP “at-risk” 1.05 (1.02 −1.08)* 2.36 (1.09, 5.13)* 1.28 (0.57, 2.94) 0.74 (0.31, 1.73) 1.12 (1.05 −1.20)* 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)
DBP “at-risk” 0.99 (0.97, 1.01) 3.2 (1.58, 6.64)* 1.29 (0.59, 2.46) 1.23 (0.58, 2.46) 1.02 (0.97, 1.08) 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)
CHOL “at-risk” 1.03 (1.01, 1.06)* 0.64 (0.23, 1.61) 1.01 (0.43– 2.41) 1.11 (0.45, 2.86) 0.98 (0.92, 1.05) 1.00 (1.00, 1.00) 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)
TRG “at-risk” 1.02 (1.00, 1.04) 0.97 (0.47, 2.07) 0.79 (0.39, 1.58) 0.87 (0.41, 1.84) 1.03 (0.98, 1.09) 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)* 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)
HDL CHOL “at-risk” 0.96 (0.94, 0.99)* 0.38 (0.18, 0.79)* 0.68 (0.33, 1.39) 1.43 (0.66, 3.12) 1.00 (0.95, 1.06) 1.00 (1.00, 1.00) 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)
GLU “at-risk”2 1.01 (0.98, 1.04) 0.79 (0.27, 2.09) 1.38 (0.56, 3.49) 2.81 (0.98, 9.36) 0.95 (0.88, 1.02) 1.00 (1.00, 1.00) 1.01 (1.00, 1.01)*
Quintile risk score3 1.01 (0.99, 1.02) 1.55 (0.83, 2.89) 0.88 (0.48, 1.61) 1.41 (0.75, 2.67) 1.02 (0.97, 1.07) 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)* 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)

1Results displayed as ORs (95% CIs). Risk categories were defined according to the cutoffs indicated in Table 1. *Statistically significant at P < 0.05. BFP, body fat percentage; CHOL, cholesterol; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; GLU, glucose; HDL CHOL, HDL cholesterol; MVPA, moderate-to-vigorous activity; SBP, systolic blood pressure; Time meal, minutes since last meal; TRG, triglycerides; UP, ultraprocessed; WC, waist circumference.

2Nonfasting glucose “at-risk” category was adjusted by time of last meal according to the cutoffs indicated in  Table 1.

3Ordinal logistic regression.