Skip to main content

Table 5 Association between household food insecurity statusa and adherence to the two identified dietary patterns

From: Food insecurity was negatively associated with adherence to the “fruits, vegetables, and foods rich in animal protein” dietary pattern among university students’ households: the 2018 Mexican National Household Survey

Adherence to dietary patterns

Food security

(n = 5301)

Mild-Food Insecurity

(n = 1240)

pb

Moderate-Food Insecurity

(n = 680)

p

Severe-Food Insecurity

(n = 438)

pb

OR (95% CI)

OR (95% CI)

 

OR (95% CI)

 

OR (95% CI)

 

Fruits, vegetables, and foods rich in animal protein pattern

 Crude

1.00

0.29 (0.25, 0.33)

 < 0.001

0.17 (0.14, 0.20)

 < 0.001

0.12 (0.09, 0.16)

 < 0.001

 Model 1

1.00

0.30 (0.26, 0.34)

 < 0.001

0.18 (0.15, 0.22)

 < 0.001

0.13 (0.10, 0.17)

 < 0.001

 Model 2

1.00

0.34 (0.30, 0.40)

 < 0.001

0.20 (0.16, 0.24)

 < 0.001

0.14 (0.11, 0.19)

 < 0.001

Traditional-Westernized pattern

 Crude

1.00

0.91 (0.67, 1.24)

0.570

0.73 (0.51, 1.05)

0.090

0.49 (0.33, 0.71)

 < 0.001

 Model 1

1.00

0.91 (0.67, 1.24)

0.557

0.74 (0.51, 1.06)

0.101

0.48 (0.33, 0.70)

 < 0.001

 Model 2

1.00

0.82 (0.60, 1.13)

0.225

0.69 (0.47, 1.00)

0.053

0.51 (0.34, 0.76)

0.001

  1. Data are presented as Odds Ratio (OR) with correspondent 95% confidence interval (95% CI)
  2. Model 1: adjusted for students’ sex (man, woman), age (years), marital status (not in a relationship, partnered), indigenous self-identification (no, yes), academic year (3rd to 5th year, 2nd year, 1st year), and enrollment college type (private, public)
  3. Model 2: adjusted by model 1 variables plus household’s head age (years), household’s head sex (man, woman), household’s head education (bachelor´s degree or more, elementary to high school, incomplete elementary school or less); household type (nuclear, extended, others), type of locality (metropolitan, urban, rural), and socioeconomic status (high, upper-middle, lower-middle, low)
  4. p < 0.05 was considered significant
  5. Adherence: percentage of adherence ≥ 51, Non-adherence: percentage of adherence ≤ 50
  6. a According to the Mexican Food Security Scale
  7. bp-Values from logistic regression