Skip to main content
. 2021 Jul 28;20:77. doi: 10.1186/s12944-021-01506-9

Table 2.

Logistic regression analyses for the association between TyG-BMI and incident NAFLD in different models

Odds ratios (95% confidence interval)
Crude model Model 1 Model 2 Model 3
TyG-BMI(per SD increase) 6.17 (5.75, 6.62) 5.40 (5.01, 5.83) 3.87 (3.51, 4.26) 3.90 (3.54, 4.29)
TyG-BMI (Quintile)
 Quintile 1 Ref Ref Ref Ref
 Quintile 2 5.17 (2.70, 9.89) 4.25 (2.22, 8.15) 4.04 (2.03, 8.03) 4.03 (2.03, 8.01)
 Quintile 3 19.26 (10.47, 35.43) 13.33 (7.22, 24.60) 10.72 (5.58, 20.62) 10.81 (5.63, 20.75)
 Quintile 4 70.61 (38.80,128.51) 42.25 (23.09, 77.30) 25.09 (13.11,47.99) 25.52 (13.36, 48.74)
 Quintile 5 344.54 (189.71,625.75) 186.82 (102.20,341.51) 72.84 (37.82,140.30) 74.76 (38.86,143.79)
P-trend < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001

Abbreviations: TyG-BMI: triglyceride glucose-body mass index;

Model 1 adjusted for sex, age, habits of exercise, drinking status. Smoking status, SBP, and height;

Model 2 adjusted for sex, age, ALT, AST, habits of exercise, GGT; HDL-C, TC, TG, FPG, HbA1c, smoking status, SBP and height;

Model 3 adjusted for sex, age, ALT, AST, habits of exercise, GGT; HDL-C, TC, TG, FPG, HbA1c, smoking status, drinking status, SBP and height