You are viewing the site in preview mode

Skip to main content

Table 4 Abdominal-only obesity by place of residence, physiological, and socio-economic factors among 35- to 70-year-old Tunisian women (complete-case analysis n = 2,633), multinomial logit regression

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

   AO: abdominal-only obesity (WC ≥ 88 cm & BMI < 30 kg/m2)a
   Unadjusted Adjustedb
  n %c RPRd C.I.e RPRd C.I.e
Place of residence       
Area    P = 0.33 P = 0.21
   Rural 1184 27.0% 1 - 1 -
   Urban 1449 24.6% 0.9 0.7-1.1 0.8 0.6-1.1
Region   P = 0.0004 P < 0.0001
   South-West 366 16.6% 1 - 1 -
   Center-West 433 19.2% 1.1 0.7-1.8 1.0 0.6-1.7
   North-West 440 20.5% 1.3 0.8-1.9 1.2 0.8-2.0
   South-East 384 34.1% 2.5 1.6-3.9 2.6 1.6-4.1
   Center-East 366 25.0% 1.6 1.0-2.5 1.7 1.1-2.7
   North-East 326 30.0% 2.0 1.3-3.2 2.3 1.5-3.6
   Greater Tunis 318 28.1% 1.8 1.2-2.8 2.5 1.5-4.0
Physiological factors       
Age   P = 0.0017 P = 0.88
   35-44 y. 886 21.7% 1 - 1 -
   45-54 y. 937 25.3% 1.2 0.9-1.6 1.0 0.7-1.4
   55-70 y. 810 31.0% 1.6 1.2-2.1 1.1 0.7-1.6
Menopause   P = 0.0004 P = 0.093
   No 1242 21.8% 1 - 1 -
   Yes 1391 29.4% 1.5 1.2-1.8 1.3 0.8-1.5
Parity   P = 0.0023 P = 0.061
   1st tertile (0-3) 772 22.0% 1 - 1 -
   2nd tertile (4-5) 819 24.1% 1.1 0.8-1.5 1.1 0.8-1.5
   3rd tertile (6+) 1042 30.7% 1.6 1.2-2.0 1.4 1.0-2.0
Socio-economic position       
Marital status   P = 0.46 P = 0.79
   Other 443 27.3% 1 - 1 -
   Married 2190 25.0% 0.9 0.7-1.2 0.9 0.5-1.6
Education   P = 0.13 P = 0.97
   No formal schooling 1550 27.7% 1 - 1 -
   Primary school 769 24.0% 0.8 0.6-1.1 1.0 0.7-1.3
   Secondary or more 314 21.3% 0.7 0.5-1.0 0.9 0.5-1.6
Professional activity   P = 0.0095 P = 0.038
   Not working/Retired 2142 27.1% 1 - 1 -
   Employee/worker 376 18.4% 0.6 0.4-0.9 0.6 0.4-0.9
   Upper/Intermediate 115 22.0% 0.7 0.4-1.3 1.0 0.5-1.7
Household welfare index f   P = 0.67 P = 0.94
   1st quintile 710 25.5% 1 - 1 -
   2nd quintile 657 27.6% 1.1 0.8-1.5 1.1 0.8-1.5
   3rd quintile 568 25.9% 1.0 0.8-1.4 1.0 0.7-1.4
   4th quintile 385 25.1% 1.0 0.7-1.4 0.9 0.6-1.4
   5th quintile 313 22.5% 0.9 0.6-1.2 0.9 0.5-1.5
  1. aVs. being a concordant subject (i.e., both abdominal and overall obese or neither abdominal nor overall obese). Results for the second response variable category (OO, overall-only obesity: WC <88 cm & BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2) are not presented owing to the small overall proportion of OO subjects (1.6%).
  2. bAssociation of response variable with each place of residence, physiological, or socio-economic variable adjusted for all other variables in column 1.
  3. cPrevalence proportion (weighted estimates).
  4. dRPR: for category of cofactor vs. reference category (for which RPR = 1), crude or adjusted Relative Prevalence Ratio of being AO, i.e., having abdominal-only obesity vs. being a concordant subject (i.e., both abdominal and overall obese or neither abdominal nor overall obese).
  5. e0.95 confidence interval taking into account sampling design.
  6. fIncreasing household welfare level from 1st to 5th quintile.
Back to article page

Population Health Metrics

ISSN: 1478-7954