You are viewing the site in preview mode

Skip to main content

Table 3 Overall and abdominal obesity by place of residence, physiological, and socio-economic factors among 35- to 70-year-old Tunisian women (complete-case analysis n = 2,633)

From: Abdominal vs. overall obesity among women in a nutrition transition context: geographic and socio-economic patterns of abdominal-only obesity in Tunisia

   Overall obesity (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2) Abdominal obesity (WC ≥ 88 cm)
   Unadjusted Adjusteda Unadjusted Adjusteda
  n %b ORc C.I.d ORc C.I.d %b ORc C.I.d ORc C.I.d
Place of residence            
Area    P < 0.0001 P = 0.021   P < 0.0001 P = 0.45
   Rural 1184 24.1% 1 - 1 - 49.7% 1 - 1 -
   Urban 1449 45.0% 2.6 2.0-3.3 1.4 1.1-1.7 67.7% 2.1 1.6-2.7 1.1 0.9-1.5
Region    P < 0.0001 P < 0.0001   P < 0.0001 P < 0.0001
   South-West 366 32.9% 1 - 1 - 43.1% 1 - 1 -
   Center-West 433 25.0% 0.7 0.5-1.0 1.0 0.7-1.5 42.4% 1.0 0.6-1.5 1.2 0.8-1.9
   North-West 440 26.5% 0.7 0.5-1.2 1.0 0.7-1.6 42.8% 1.0 0.7-1.5 1.3 0.9-2.0
   South-East 384 44.9% 1.7 1.1-2.6 1.7 1.1-2.6 77.2% 4.5 3.1-6.4 5.0 3.4-7.2
   Center-East 366 39.9% 1.4 0.9-2.0 1.3 0.9-1.9 63.9% 2.3 1.6-3.4 2.5 1.7-3.8
   North-East 326 35.7% 1.1 0.8-1.7 1.3 0.9-1.8 65.1% 2.5 1.7-3.6 3.1 2.1-4.7
   Greater Tunis 318 49.3% 1.9 1.3-3.0 1.7 1.1-2.5 77.1% 4.4 2.7-7.4 5.4 3.5-8.2
Physiological factors            
Age    P = 0.029 P = 0.035   P < 0.0001 P = 0.018
   35-44 y. 886 34.0% 1 - 1 - 53.6% 1 - 1 -
   45-54 y. 937 42.5% 1.4 1.1-1.9 1.6 1.1-2.2 66.2% 1.7 1.3-2.2 1.5 1.1-2.1
   55-70 y. 810 38.6% 1.2 1.0-1.6 1.5 1.0-2.2 68.5% 1.9 1.4-2.5 1.5 1.0-2.2
Menopause    P = 0.96 P = 0.22   P = 0.001 P = 0.46
   No 1242 37.9% 1 - 1 - 57.5% 1 - 1 -
   Yes 1391 38.0% 1.0 0.8-1.2 0.8 0.6-1.1 66.3% 1.5 1.2-1.8 1.1 0.8-1.5
Parity    P = 0.023 P = 0.55   P = 0.22 P = 0.019
   1st tertile (0-3) 772 38.4% 1 - 1 - 58.4% 1 - 1 -
   2nd tertile (4-5) 819 41.6% 1.1 0.9-1.5 1.2 0.9-1.5 63.7% 1.3 1.0-1.6 1.3 1.0-1.7
   3rd tertile (6+) 1042 33.8% 0.8 0.6-1.1 1.0 0.7-1.4 63.4% 1.2 0.9-1.6 1.5 1.1-2.0
Socio-economic position          
Marital status    P = 0.65 P = 0.89   P = 0.63 P = 0.55
   Other 443 39.2% 1 - 1 - 65.4% 1 - 1 -
   Married 2190 37.7% 0.9 0.7-1.2 1.0 0.7-1.3 61.0% 0.8 0.6-1.1 0.9 0.7-1.2
Education    P < 0.0001 P = 0.12   P = 0.0081 P = 0.048
   No formal schooling 1550 32.5% 1 - 1 - 59.1% 1 - 1 -
   Primary school 769 45.6% 1.7 1.4-2.2 1.2 0.9-1.6 67.3% 1.4 1.1-1.8 1.1 0.9-1.5
   Secondary or more 314 39.8% 1.4 1.0-1.9 0.9 0.5-1.4 59.0% 1.0 0.7-1.4 0.7 0.5-1.1
Professional activity    P = 0.54 P = 0.079   P = 0.035 P = 0.014
   Not working/Retired 2142 38.6% 1 - 1 - 63.9% 1 - 1 -
   Employee/worker 376 38.0% 1.0 0.7-1.4 1.0 0.7-1.5 54.9% 0.7 0.5-1.0 0.7 0.5-1.0
   Upper/Intermediate 115 31.9% 0.7 0.4-1.3 0.5 0.3-0.9 53.5% 0.7 0.4-1.1 0.5 0.3-0.9
Household welfare index e    P < 0.0001 P < 0.0001   P < 0.0001 P < 0.001
   1st quintile 710 17.0% 1 - 1 - 41.8% 1 - 1 -
   2nd quintile 657 33.6% 2.5 1.8-3.5 1.9 1.4-2.7 59.4% 2.0 1.5-2.7 1.6 1.2-2.1
   3rd quintile 568 45.3% 4.0 2.9-5.6 2.8 2.0-4.0 70.0% 3.1 2.3-4.1 2.2 1.6-3.0
   4th quintile 385 50.5% 5.0 3.5-7.0 3.5 2.4-5.2 72.8% 3.7 2.7-5.3 2.7 1.9-3.9
   5th quintile 313 46.9% 4.3 2.9-6.4 3.6 2.3-5.7 68.2% 3.0 1.9-4.7 2.8 1.9-4.3
  1. aAssociation of response variable with each place of residence, physiological, or socio-economic variable adjusted for all other variables in column 1.
  2. bPrevalence proportion (weighted estimates).
  3. cPrevalence Odds-Ratio vs. reference category for which OR = 1, taking into account sampling design.
  4. d0.95 confidence interval taking into account sampling design.
  5. eIncreasing household welfare level from 1st to 5th quintile.
Back to article page

Population Health Metrics

ISSN: 1478-7954