Skip to main content

Table 3 Unstratified Odds Ratios of Individual-Level Healthy Lifestyle Behaviors

From: Evidence that collaborative action between local health departments and nonprofit hospitals helps foster healthy behaviors in communities: a multilevel study

  Eating Vegetables Eating Fruit General Exercise Vigorous Exercise Healthy Weight Healthy Lifestyle Index
Odds Ratio 95% CI Odds Ratio 95% CI Odds Ratio 95% CI Odds Ratio 95% CI Odds Ratio 95% CI Odds Ratio 95% CI
Primary Predictors of Interest
 Collaborative action 1.29* 1.06, 1.57 1.16 0.99, 1.35 1.17 1.00, 1.38 1.17* 1.05, 1.30 1.06 0.93, 1.21 1.12* 1.05, 1.19
 Social capital index 1.10 0.94, 1.29 1.11 0.92, 1.33 0.91 0.73, 1.13 1.05 0.92, 1.19 0.95 0.78, 1.17 1.07* 1.01, 1.14
Individual-level Covariates
 Male 0.64* 0.57, 0.72 0.71* 0.58, 0.87 1.15 0.99, 1.33 1.02 0.92, 1.14 0.44* 0.35, 0.57 0.96 0.88, 1.06
 Married 1.35* 1.09, 1.66 1.27* 1.09, 1.48 1.18 0.97, 1.45 1.31* 1.07, 1.62 0.80* 0.71, 0.90 1.12* 1.03, 1.21
 College 1.16 0.94, 1.42 1.16* 1.08, 1.25 1.14 0.90, 1.44 1.16* 1.01, 1.34 1.15 0.92, 1.43 1.11* 1.05, 1.18
 Black 0.59* 0.42, 0.82 1.17 0.92, 1.49 0.69 0.47, 1.00 0.97 0.81, 1.18 0.52* 0.35, 0.78 0.87 0.74, 1.01
 Hispanic 1.13 0.80, 1.60 1.25* 1.07, 1.44 0.76* 0.63, 0.92 0.91 0.74, 1.13 0.59* 0.52, 0.68 0.86* 0.79, 0.94
 Asian 0.99 0.72, 1.36 1.28 0.86, 1.90 0.71 0.49, 1.04 0.92 0.68, 1.25 1.68* 1.37, 2.07 0.82* 0.75, 0.89
 Other Race 1.07 0.57, 2.01 1.02 0.66, 1.59 1.03 0.51, 2.06 1.08 0.48, 2.45 0.95 0.43, 2.08 1.01 0.81, 1.26
 Age 1.03 0.98, 1.08 1.07* 1.04, 1.11 0.85* 0.82, 0.89 0.81* 0.79, 0.83 0.81* 0.77, 0.85 0.99 0.96, 1.01
 Insured 1.05 0.78, 1.41 1.08 0.93, 1.26 1.46* 1.03, 2.06 1.28* 1.04, 1.57 1.02 0.81, 1.30 1.11* 1.03, 1.21
 Income <$15 k 0.54* 0.34, 0.87 0.70* 0.56, 0.88 0.49* 0.37, 0.64 0.73* 0.55, 0.96 0.92 0.70, 1.22 0.93 0.80, 1.09
 Income $15 k–75 k 0.79* 0.64, 0.99 0.91 0.77, 1.08 0.72* 0.62, 0.84 0.86* 0.75, 0.98 0.98 0.83, 1.17 0.97 0.90, 1.03
Community-level Covariates
 Median household income 1.06* 1.02, 1.10 1.06 0.98, 1.14 1.02 0.96, 1.08 1.05* 1.01. 1.09 1.02 0.95, 1.10 1.00 0.98, 1.02
 Percent Black 0.89* 0.82, 0.97 0.88* 0.78, 1.00 0.94 0.82, 1.08 1.01 0.93, 1.11 0.99 0.89, 1.10 0.99 0.96, 1.03
 Above Average FTEs 0.97 0.79, 1.18 1.18 0.91, 1.52 0.99 0.75, 1.31 0.91 0.77, 1.07 1.08 0.85, 1.38 1.01 0.91, 1.11
 Local Board of Health 0.82* 0.70, 0.95 0.912 0.75, 1.14 0.99 0.82, 1.19 0.97 0.85, 1.10 1.04 0.84, 1.27 0.96 0.89, 1.03
State-level Covariates
 Expanded Medicaid 0.74* 0.65, 0.85 1.10 0.94, 1.29 0.92 0.77, 1.10 0.82* 0.73, 0.93 0.96 0.85, 1.08 0.95 0.90, 1.01
p-value for interaction 0.23 0.46 0.03 0.40 0.14 0.13
  1. *P < 0.05. The social capital index was dichotomized into communities with an index above the median (1 = yes) and below the median in our sample (0 = no). Individual-level covariates included being male, being married, graduating college, being Black, Asian, Hispanic, or Other race, having income in the specified range (<$15,000/year, 15,000 to 75,000/year), and having health insurance. The reference category for education was having less than a college degree and the reference for income was greater than $75,000 per year. The remaining dichotomous predictors were coded as 1 = yes; 0 = no. The number of FTEs at the LHD was =1 if the LHD had more than the average FTEs in the Profile 2013 survey (mean = 65). Community-level covariates included continuous measures of the population: percent black (Area Resource File, 2016; rescaled to a one-standard deviation change) and median household income (2014; rescaled to a $10,000 unit change). A second model with an interaction term between collaborative action and social capital was also analyzed. The p-value for interaction is provided.