Table 3.
Eating behaviours and weight status by household food security status in adolescents, adjusted estimates*
Characteristics | Food secure (n 1395) | Food insecure (n 890) | P | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
% | 95 % CI | % | 95 % CI | ||||
Breakfast (eaten per week) | |||||||
Mean | 4·3 | 4·1 | 0·227 | ||||
95 % CI | 4·2, 4·5 | 3·9, 4·4 | |||||
Lunch (eaten per week) | |||||||
Mean | 5·9 | 5·8 | 0·361 | ||||
95 % CI | 5·8, 6·0 | 5·6, 6·0 | |||||
Dinner (eaten per week) | |||||||
Mean | 6·0 | 6·1 | 0·601 | ||||
95 % CI | 5·9, 6·2 | 5·9, 6·3 | |||||
UWCB (any) | 37·8 | 35·4, 40·2 | 44·5 | 39·9, 49·1 | 0·007 | ||
Extreme UWCB | 3·2 | 2·3, 4·5 | 4·1 | 3·0, 5·6 | 0·094 | ||
Binge eating | 14·0 | 12·5, 15·6 | 12·9 | 11·4, 14·5 | 0·143 | ||
Binge with loss of control | 7·5 | 6·4, 8·7 | 6·9 | 5·2, 9·1 | 0·645 | ||
UWCB | |||||||
Fasted | 10·0 | 8·4, 11·8 | 13·4 | 10·6, 16·9 | 0·047 | ||
Ate very little food | 29·1 | 27·0, 31·3 | 32·0 | 27·7, 36·6 | 0·184 | ||
Volitional vomiting | 1·9 | 1·3, 3·0 | 1·5 | 0·7, 3·2 | 0·472 | ||
Skipped meals | 24·5 | 22·0, 27·1 | 28·6 | 25·3, 32·1 | 0·075 | ||
Diet pill use | 1·2 | 0·8, 1·8 | 1·4 | 0·9, 2·1 | 0·592 | ||
Laxative use | 0·3 | 0·1, 0·9 | 0·8 | 0·3, 2·0 | 0·005 | ||
Diuretic use | † | † | † | † | † | ||
Food substitute use | 6·3 | 5·3, 7·5 | 6·8 | 5·4, 8·5 | 0·599 | ||
Smoked more cigarettes | 1·7 | 1·0, 2·8 | 2·0 | 1·4, 2·9 | 0·553 | ||
Overweight | 35·6 | 32·7, 38·5 | 37·6 | 33·4, 42·1 | 0·391 |
UWCB, Unhealthy Weight Control Behaviour.
P-values are bolded if statistically significant at the 0·05 significance level.
Logistic regression models with robust standard errors were used to estimate marginal probabilities and 95 % CI for each binary outcome variable adjusted for parental education, race/ethnicity, age, sex and potential clustering by school. Similarly adjusted multiple regression models with robust standard errors were used to estimate means and 95 % CI for mean number of breakfast, lunch and dinner outcomes.
Prevalence is too low to estimate result.