Skip to main content

Table 1 Definition of data sets and analysis

From: Like me, like you – relative importance of peers and siblings on children’s fast food consumption and screen time but not sports club participation depends on age

Model Na Target children Nb Comment Analysis Table/Figure
1 5388 Randomly assigned child per family 2694 All children CS Table 3
1a 2795 Boys, randomly assigned 1387 Stratified by the sex of the target child CS Table 3
1b 2593 Girls, randomly assigned 1307 CS Table 3
1c 2726 Randomly assigned child with a SS sibling 1363 Stratified by the sex of the sibling CS Table 3
1d 2662 Randomly assigned child with an OS sibling 1331 CS Table 3
1e 2572 Randomly assigned child with a near-aged sibling 1286 Stratified by the age difference with the sibling (≤ 2.7 vs >  2.7 years) CS Table 3
1f 2816 Randomly assigned child with a much younger or older sibling 1408 CS Table 3
1 g 1920 Randomly assigned child, <  7 years 959 Stratified by age groups of the target children (<  7, 7–8, 9–10 and ≥ 11 years) CS Figure 1
1 h 1201 Randomly assigned child, 7–8 years 585 CS Figure 1
1i 1095 Randomly assigned child, 9–10 years 570 CS Figure 1
1j 1172 Randomly assigned child, ≥11 years 580 CS Figure 1
2 1050 Randomly assigned child per family 525 All children L Table 4
2a 548 Boys, randomly assigned 272 Stratified by the sex of the target child L Table 4
2b 502 Girls, randomly assigned 253 L Table 4
2c 530 Randomly assigned child with a same-sex sibling 265 Stratified by the sex of the sibling L Table 4
2d 520 Randomly assigned child with an opposite-sex sibling 260 L Table 4
2e 380 Randomly assigned child with a near-aged sibling 190 Stratified by the age difference with the sibling (≤ 2.7 vs >  2.7 years) L Table 4
2f 670 Randomly assigned child with a much younger or older sibling 335 L Table 4
  1. aNumber of observations on children from 2-child families
  2. bNumber of target children (= number of observations)
  3. CS cross-sectional, L longitudinal