Skip to main content

Table 4 Association between the traditional and transitioning DP and anthropometric/DBM status (Multinomial logistic regression models)

From: Adolescents’ dietary patterns, their drivers and association with double burden of malnutrition in adolescents: a cross-sectional study in Kenya’s urban slums

 

Traditional DP

Q1 (Ref)

Q2

Q3

Q4

p trend

RRR

95% CI

 

RRR

95% CI

 

RRR

95% CI

 

Overweight and obesity

Overall sample

Model 1

0.63

0.31

1.29

1.14

0.59

2.20

1.35

0.67

2.72

0.22

Model 2

0.66

0.32

1.36

1.16

0.60

2.25

1.34

0.66

2.71

0.26

Girls

Model 1

0.51

0.22

1.19

0.99

0.45

2.14

1.35

0.59

3.09

0.14

Model 2

0.56

0.24

1.31

1.00

0.46

2.19

1.31

0.57

3.03

0.20

Boys

Model 1

0.84

0.17

4.09

1.02

0.21

5.05

2.14

0.41

11.22

0.87

Model 2

0.84

0.17

4.14

1.01

0.20

5.03

2.16

0.41

11.45

0.86

Thinness

Overall Sample

model 1

0.51

0.17

1.58

1.49

0.63

3.56

0.94

0.35

2.56

0.70

model 2

0.52

0.17

1.59

1.49

0.62

3.57

0.95

0.35

2.59

0.69

Girls

Model 1

0.25

0.02

2.59

1.01

0.20

5.21

2.62

0.48

14.44

0.17

Model 2

0.23

0.02

2.48

1.00

0.19

5.28

2.68

0.47

15.38

0.20

Boys

Model 1

0.60

0.15

2.44

1.55

0.49

4.93

0.40

0.10

1.61

0.38

Model 2

0.62

0.15

2.53

1.53

0.48

4.91

0.41

0.10

1.67

0.41

Stunting

Overall sample

model 1

0.79

0.38

1.61

0.93

0.47

1.84

1.07

0.53

2.15

0.71

model 2

0.81

0.39

1.66

0.95

0.48

1.88

1.09

0.54

2.19

0.73

Girls

Model 1

0.16

0.04

0.64*

0.66

0.26

1.67

0.72

0.27

1.91

0.89

Model 2

0.17

0.04

0.65

0.66

0.26

1.69

0.71

0.26

1.91

0.81

Boys

Model 1

2.20

0.76

6.39

1.48

0.49

4.41

1.45

0.48

4.34

0.63

Model 2

2.24

0.77

6.53

1.56

0.52

4.73

1.51

0.50

4.58

0.60

 

Transitioning DP

Q1 (Ref)

Q2

Q3

Q4

p trend

RRR

95% CI

RRR

95% CI

RRR

95%CI

Overweight and obesity

Overall sample

Model 1

1.01

0.49

2.08

1.48

0.73

3.00

1.51

0.73

3.13

0.58

Model 2

1.02

0.49

2.10

1.41

0.69

2.87

1.25

0.58

2.72

0.87

Girls

Model 1

1.32

0.55

3.14

2.97

1.25

7.10*

2.18

0.88

5.42

0.13

Model 2

1.42

0.59

3.40

2.79

1.16

6.71*

1.75

0.68

4.55

0.49

Boys

Model 1

0.43

0.08

2.30

0.29

0.05

1.82

1.96

0.42

9.11

0.77

Model 2

0.48

0.09

2.61

0.31

0.05

1.95

2.58

0.47

14.23

0.83

Thinness

Overall Sample

model 1

0.37

0.13

1.08

0.70

0.27

1.78

1.05

0.44

2.53

0.60

model 2

0.37

0.13

1.10

0.71

0.28

1.82

1.13

0.44

2.95

0.57

Girls

Model 1

0.94

0.17

5.10

1.16

0.17

7.91

3.77

0.74

19.05

0.13

Model 2

1.17

0.21

6.57

1.40

0.20

9.83

3.99

0.72

22.23

0.16

Boys

Model 1

0.17

0.03

0.88

0.40

0.12

1.30

0.79

0.24

2.60

0.81

Model 2

0.19

0.03

1.02

0.42

0.13

1.39

1.09

0.28

4.28

0.89

Stunting

Overall sample

model 1

0.73

0.35

1.52

1.03

0.53

2.03

1.04

0.52

2.06

0.83

model 2

0.73

0.35

1.52

1.00

0.51

1.97

0.90

0.43

1.87

0.77

Girls

Model 1

0.51

0.18

1.45

0.87

0.32

2.37

0.88

0.32

2.38

0.79

Model 2

0.54

0.19

1.54

0.85

0.31

2.34

0.80

0.28

2.30

0.95

Boys

Model 1

1.21

0.41

3.59

1.29

0.49

3.36

1.47

0.53

4.03

0.68

Model 2

1.11

0.36

3.35

1.22

0.46

3.23

1.22

0.40

3.76

1.00

  1. Model 1—Adjusting for age, education, meal skipping, ethnicity, slum of residence, duration of residency
  2. Model 2—Adjusting for variables in model 1 + energy intake and physical activity
  3. *p < 0.05
Back to article page

Journal of Health, Population and Nutrition

ISSN: 2072-1315

Contact us