Skip to main content

Table 3 Associations of economic resources with variety of fruit or vegetable intakes in older adults in the EPIC-Norfolk study

From: Gender and the double burden of economic and social disadvantages on healthy eating: cross-sectional study of older adults in the EPIC-Norfolk cohort

 

Fruit Variety

Vegetable Variety

 

Women

Men

Women

Men

 

Model 1

Model 2

Model 1

Model 2

Model 1

Model 2

Model 1

Model 2

Social class

High

reference

reference

reference

reference

reference

reference

reference

reference

Low

−0.43a

−0.50

−0.71a

−0.57

−1.15a

−1.30

−1.59a

−1.49

(-0.56, -0.30)

(-0.67, -0.33)

(-0.86, -0.56)

(-0.76, -0.38)

(-1.37, -0.93)

(-1.58, -1.02)

(-1.84, -1.35)

(-1.82, -1.17)

 

***

***

***

***

***

***

***

***

Education

High

reference

reference

reference

reference

reference

reference

reference

reference

Low

−0.61

−0.61a

−0.52

−0.36a

−1.39

−1.61a

−1.17

−1.05a

(-0.73, -0.48)

(-0.77, -0.45)

(-0.67, -0.38)

(-0.55, -0.17)

(-1.60, -1.18)

(-1.87, -1.34)

(-1.41, -0.93)

(-1.37, -0.73)

 

***

***

***

***

***

***

***

***

Paying bills

No difficulty

reference

reference

reference

reference

reference

reference

reference

reference

Difficulty

−0.54

−0.50a

−0.43

−0.11a

−0.72

−0.42

−0.82

−0.56

(-0.77, -0.31)

(-0.79, -0.21)

(-0.71, -0.15)

(-0.46, 0.24)

(-1.10, -0.33)

(-0.91, 0.07)

(-1.28, -0.35)

(-1.15, 0.04)

 

***

**

**

 

***

***

 
  1. Gender-specific beta coefficients (CI95) obtained by linear regression models using an interaction term and adjusting for age and energy intake (Model 1), and then for social relationships (marital status, living arrangement and frequency of friend contact) (Model 2). Numbers were: social class (Model 1: 9,407; Model 2: 5,522); education (Model 1: 9,574; Model 2: 5,608); paying bills (Model 1: 8,762; Model 2: 5,582). *p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001; aSignificant gender difference (p-interaction<0.10)