Skip to main content

Table 2 Logistic regression analysis between RFM with gallstones

From: Relative fat mass as a predictor of gallstones: insights from national health and nutrition examination survey data

subgroups

Model1

Model2

Model3

OR (95%CI)

P-value

OR (95%CI)

P-value

OR (95%CI)

P-value

RFM (continuous)

1.090 (1.082, 1.098)

< 0.001

1.108 (1.094, 1.122)

< 0.001

1.075 (1.050, 1.101)

< 0.001

RFM (category)

     

Q1 (≤ 29.8)

1(Ref)

 

1(Ref)

 

1(Ref)

 

Q2 (29.8–35.6)

2.110 (1.686, 2.640)

< 0.001

1.826 (1.452, 2.296)

< 0.001

1.683 (1.126, 2.518)

0.011

Q3 (35.6–43.6)

2.819 (2.271, 3.499)

< 0.001

2.581 (1.971, 3.380)

< 0.001

2.350 (1.458, 3.787)

< 0.001

Q4 (> 43.6)

6.933 (5.671, 8.477)

< 0.001

6.213 (4.628, 8.340)

< 0.001

4.125 (2.399, 7.094)

< 0.001

P for trend

1.880 (1.775, 1.991)

< 0.001

1.901 (1.731, 2.088)

< 0.001

1.614 (1.359, 1.917)

< 0.001

  1. Model 1: None covariates were adjusted; Model 2: gender, age and race were adjusted; Model 3: gender, age, race, BMI, drinking, educational level, TC, moderate physical activities, diabetes, TG, PIR, albumin, hypertension, ALT, LDL-c, AST, creatinine, FPG, GGT, uric acid, total water, total energy, total sugar and total fat were adjusted
Back to article page

Lipids in Health and Disease

ISSN: 1476-511X