Skip to main content

Table 3 HLM Results (N = 229)

From: The impact of home, work, and church environments on fat intake over time among rural residents: a longitudinal observational study

 

Model 1

Model 2

Model 3

Model 4

Fixed effects

 Intercept

33.73***

35.46***

35.46***

35.67***

Level 1-time-varying variables

 Time (in years)

1.25***

1.67***

1.81***

1.55

 Individual

  BMI

  

−0.02

−0.03

 Home environment

  F&V inventory

  

0.12*

0.12

  Fat items inventory

  

0.20*

0.19*

Level 2-time-invariant variables

 Individual

  Age (0 = 40 years)

 

−0.02

0.0004

−0.002

  Gender (0 = male)

 

−0.55

−0.41

−0.35

  Education (0 = high school/less)

 

0.25

0.35

0.34

  Self-efficacy healthy eating

  

−0.35*

−0.37*

 Home environment

  Family support healthy eating

  

−0.01

−0.01

 Church environment

  Church social support

  

−0.12

−0.11

  Church messages

  

0.64*

0.88*

  Church healthy food

  

−1.18**

−1.13*

  Church programs

  

0.32

0.19

 Work environment

  Work social support

  

0.43

0.20

  Work lunch facilities

  

0.04

−0.24

  Work healthy foods

  

−0.24

0.37

  Work programs

  

−0.06

−0.65

Cross-level Interactions-predicting change in fat intake over time

 Individual

  Time*Age

 

−0.05**

−0.05**

−0.05**

  Time*Gender

 

0.70*

0.67*

0.62*

  Time*Education

 

−0.38

−0.46

−0.50

  Time*Self-efficacy healthy eating

   

0.06

 Home environment

  Time*Family social support

   

0.02

 Church environment

  Time*Church social support

   

−0.01

  Time*Church messages

   

−0.46

  Time*Church healthy food

   

−0.05

  Time*Church programs

   

0.36

 Work environment

  Time*Work social support

   

0.35

  Time*Work lunch facilities

   

0.40

  Time*Work healthy foods

   

−0.90*

  Time*Work programs

   

−0.86*

  Time*Work healthy foods change

   

0.63

  Time*Work programs change

   

−0.24

Random effects

 τ00 (intercept)

2.09***

2.13***

1.67***

1.68***

 τ11 (Time)

0.78*

0.59*

0.74*

0.65*

 σ2

3.28***

3.25***

3.19***

3.19***

Model fit

 Reduction in τ00

7.4 %

5.7 %

26.0 %

25.6 %

 Reduction in τ11

 

24.4 %

5.1 %

16.7 %

 Reduction in σ2

20.6 %

21.3 %

22.8 %

22.8 %

 Deviance

3170.8

3165.0

2974.0

2947.3

 AIC

3176.8

3171.1

2980.0

2953.3

 BIC

3187.3

3181.5

2990.3

2963.6

  1. Note: All models account for clustering of participants in counties. † p < 0.10 * p < 0.05 ** p < 0.01 *** p < 0.0001