Skip to main content

Table 6 Assessment of confounding to associations between built and socioeconomic environment factor score quartiles and weekly bouts of MVPA [exp(coeff)]1, Males (n = 8,668)

From: Built and socioeconomic environments: patterning and associations with physical activity in U.S. adolescents

  exp(coefficient) (95% CI) [change in coefficient2]
Quartile [median (range)] Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4
Homogenous landscape score     
1 [-0.86 (-1.43, -0.68)] 1 1 1 1
2 [-0.49 (-0.68, -0.27)] 0.98 (0.93, 1.03) 0.98 (0.93, 1.03) 0.98 (0.93, 1.03) 0.98 (0.93, 1.03)
3 [0.00 (-0.27, 0.35)] 0.95 (0.91, 1.00) 0.95 (0.91, 1.00) [0%] 0.95 (0.91, 1.00)* [4%] 0.95 (0.91, 1.00)* [2%]
4 [1.04 (0.35, 5.46)] 0.92 (0.87, 0.97)* 0.90 (0.85, 0.95)* [18%] 0.90 (0.85, 0.96)* [-3%] 0.91 (0.86, 0.96)* [-5%]
Intensity (pay facilities) score     
1 [-0.82 (-1.45, -0.68)] 1 1 1 1
2[-0.51 (-0.68, -0.25)] 1.04 (1.00, 1.09) 1.02 (0.97, 1.07) [-57%] 1.01 (0.97, 1.06) 1.02 (0.97, 1.06)
3 [-0.01 (-0.25, 0.37)] 1.01 (0.97, 1.06) 1.01 (0.95, 1.08) 1.00 (0.94, 1.07) 1.02 (0.95, 1.08)
4 [0.94 (0.37, 14.31)] 1.03 (0.97, 1.08) 1.05 (0.97, 1.13) [78%] 1.04 (0.97, 1.12) [-15%] 1.05 (0.98, 1.13) [4%]
Intensity (public facilities) score     
1 [-0.75 (-1.25, -0.67)] 1 1 1 1
2 [-0.59 (-0.67, -0.40)] 1.01 (0.97, 1.05) 0.98 (0.94, 1.03) 0.98 (0.94, 1.03) 0.99 (0.94, 1.03)
3 [-0.06 (-0.40, 0.41)] 0.95 (0.91, 1.00)* 0.92 (0.86, 0.98)* [66%] 0.92 (0.86, 0.99)* [-8%] 0.93 (0.86, 0.99)* [-10%]
4 [1.14 (0.41, 10.26)] 1.03 (0.98, 1.09) 1.01 (0.94, 1.08) 1.02 (0.95, 1.09) 1.03 (0.96, 1.10)
Street Connectivity (alpha)     
1 [0.17 (-8.00, 0.21)] 1 1 1 1
2 [0.26 (0.21, 0.30)] 0.98 (0.93, 1.04) 0.98 (0.93, 1.03) 0.99 (0.94, 1.04) 0.99 (0.94, 1.04)
3 [0.33 (0.30, 0.38)] 0.96 (0.90, 1.01) 0.96 (0.91, 1.01) [-0%] 0.97 (0.92, 1.02) [-32%] 0.97 (0.93, 1.02) [-39%]
4 [0.45 (0.38, 8.00)] 0.95 (0.90, 1.01) 0.98 (0.93, 1.04) [-56%] 1.00 (0.94, 1.05) 1.00 (0.95, 1.05)
Advantageous socioeconomic/economic environment score3     
1 [-1.07 (-2.65, -0.71)]    1 1
2 [-0.30 (-0.70, 0.02)]    1.01 (0.96, 1.07) 1.01 (0.95, 1.07)
3 [0.22 (0.02, 0.55)]    1.04 (0.99, 1.10) 1.03 (0.97, 1.09)
4 [0.89 (0.55, 5.32)]    1.07 (1.01, 1.14)* 1.06 (0.98, 1.14)
Disadvantageous social environment score     
1 [-0.88 (-1.36, -0.61)]     1
2 [-0.36 (-0.61, -0.15)]     0.96 (0.92, 1.01)
3 [0.12 (-0.14, 0.43)]     0.98 (0.93, 1.04)
4 [1.15 (0.44, 4.11)]     0.95 (0.88, 1.02)
  1. *Statistically significant (p < 0.05)
  2. 1National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, Wave I (1995-96). Based on sex-stratified negative binomial regression models; value represents proportion increase in MVPA bouts. Referent category is lowest quartile.
  3. 2Change in coefficient reflects change in coefficient [(current model -previous model)/previous model]*100 for built environment characteristics only. Model 4 coefficients are compared to Model 2 coefficients. Change in estimates were omitted if both coefficients were <±0.04. Negative percent changes indicate attenuation of the association.
  4. 3In Model 3, denotes the 1-dimensional neighborhood SES factor; in model 4, denotes the Advantageous economic environment factor of the 2-dimensional neighborhood SES solution. Ranges for 1-dimensional factor quartiles: (1) -1.12 (-3.85, -0.64); (2) -0.13 (-0.64, 0.17); (3) 0.42 (0.17, 0.56); (4) 0.89 (0.56, 4.09)
  5. Model 1: Built environment characteristics separately, adjusted for individual-level sociodemographics (age, race, parental education, household income, region)
  6. Model 2: Built environment characteristics in the same model, adjusted for individual-level sociodemographics
  7. Model 3: Built environment characteristics in the same model, adjusted for individual-level sociodemographics and 1-dimensional neighborhood SES factor
  8. Model 4: Built environment characteristics in the same model, adjusted for individual-level sociodemographics and for 2-dimensional neighborhood SES factor