Table 4:
Mixed logit model for Chicago Healthy Eating Environments and Resources (CHEERS) participant mean meal preference estimates by financial burden category
| Attribute | Hard or very hard to pay for basics | Somewhat hard to pay for basics | Not hard at all to pay for basics | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coefficient | 95% CI | Relative attribute importancea | Coefficient | 95% CI | Relative attribute importancea | Coefficient | 95% CI | Relative attribute importancea | |
| Taste | 15.3% | 23.8% | 24.7% | ||||||
| Very good | 0.45b,c | (0.17, 0.73) | 0.95b,c | (0.71, 1.19) | 1.63b | (1.36, 1.90) | |||
| Good | −0.15c | (−0.47, 0.17) | 0.36b,c | (0.12, 0.60) | 0.93b | (0.68, 1.17) | |||
| OK | Reference | Reference | Reference | ||||||
| Healthfulness | 72.2% | 50.9% | 44.0% | ||||||
| Healthy | 1.76b,c | (1.39, 2.13) | 1.98b,c | (1.69, 2.28) | 2.88b | (2.55, 3.22) | |||
| Neutral | 1.24b,c | (0.87, 1.61) | 1.40b | (1.13, 1.68) | 1.73b | (1.44, 2.02) | |||
| Unhealthy | Reference | Reference | Reference | ||||||
| Price (per $2 increase) | −0.06c | (−0.18, 0.05) | 12.9% | −0.12b,c | (−0.21, −0.04) | 8.3% | −0.24b | (−0.33, −0.16) | 8.6% |
| Preparation time (per 15 minute increase) | −0.06c | (−0.17, 0.05) | 2.7% | −0.15b,c | (−0.23, −0.06) | 11.1% | −0.29b | (−0.38, −0.20) | 15.5% |
| Travel time (per 5–10 minute increase) | −0.03c | (−0.14, 0.09) | −3.1% | −0.14b | (−0.23, −0.06) | 5.9% | −0.20b | (−0.28, −0.13) | 7.2% |
a
Relative attribute importance was calculated by dividing the difference in utility between the highest and lowest level of a single attribute by the sum of the differences of all attributes
b
Attributes or attribute levels with this superscript had a significant impact on meal preference
c
Statistically significant heterogeneity compared with referent category (not hard at all to pay for basics) based on p-value for interaction terms