Skip to main content

Table 4 Multivariable logistic regression models of the association between the explanatory variables and the consumption of superfoods

From: Does social distinction contribute to socioeconomic inequalities in diet: the case of ‘superfoods’ consumption

   Spelt products Quinoa Goji berries, chia seeds or wheatgrass
Variables Categories OR 95% CI OR 95% CI OR 95% CI
Sex Men 1    1    1   
Women 1.89 1.54 2.31 2.06 1.62 2.62 2.14 1.67 2.74
Age groups 25–34 1    1    1   
35–44 1.06 .80 1.41 .71 .51 .99 .74 .53 1.04
45–54 1.25 .93 1.69 .90 .63 1.28 .57 .39 .82
55–64 .97 .72 1.31 .65 .45 .93 .57 .40 .82
65–75 .77 .44 1.32 .46 .21 1.00 .30 .13 .68
Living together with a partner Yes 1    1    1   
No .98 .77 1.25 .98 .73 1.31 1.01 .76 1.36
Birth country The Netherlands 1    1    1   
Else .73 .54 1.00 .83 .57 1.20 1.65 1.17 2.34
Children living at home No 1    1    1   
Yes .83 .65 1.06 .89 .67 1.19 .97 .72 1.32
Employment status Full-time employed 1    1    1   
Part-time employed 1.07 .83 1.38 .96 .72 1.28 .98 .73 1.32
Unemployed .52 .34 .79 .60 .36 .99 .79 .48 1.31
Retired 1.28 .74 2.21 .61 .28 1.31 .84 .37 1.90
Non-employed .94 .56 1.57 .57 .27 1.16 .65 .33 1.25
Other 1.00 .62 1.59 1.08 .61 1.90 1.21 .68 2.16
Weekly fruit & vegetable consumption (per 100 grams) 1.03 1.02 1.04 1.03 1.02 1.05 1.05 1.04 1.06
Cultural participation (quintiles) 1 lowest 1    1    1   
2 1.39 1.04 1.87 1.40 .89 2.22 1.49 .98 2.25
3 1.72 1.25 2.35 2.08 1.29 3.35 1.55 1.01 2.36
4 2.54 1.83 3.52 2.94 1.83 4.72 1.98 1.28 3.05
5 highest 2.97 2.10 4.18 3.50 2.12 5.79 2.69 1.73 4.17
Educational level Primary 1    1    1   
Lower secondary 1.78 1.00 3.16 .91 .36 2.33 1.10 .51 2.40
Upper secondary 1.87 1.04 3.37 1.45 .58 3.63 1.50 .69 3.27
Tertiary 2.55 1.41 4.62 2.37 .93 6.02 1.50 .68 3.32
Household equivalent income <€1000 1    1    1   
€1000–€1500 1.02 .71 1.45 .71 .44 1.15 .73 .44 1.20
€1500–€2000 .97 .67 1.41 .81 .50 1.31 .69 .44 1.09
€2000–€2500 .97 .66 1.42 .87 .55 1.40 .68 .42 1.07
>€2500 1.01 .65 1.58 1.18 .71 1.95 .71 .41 1.22
  1. All models included cultural participation, educational level, household equivalent income, sex, age, living together with a partner, country of birth, children living at home, employment status and fruit and vegetable consumption