Skip to main content

Table 3 Fully adjusted odds ratiosa stratified according to the supportiveness metrics

From: Does home neighbourhood supportiveness influence the location more than volume of adolescent’s physical activity? An observational study using global positioning systems

Physical activity intensity

Fully adjusted values (odds ratio, 95% CI)

More supportive

Less supportive

Differenceb

Greenspace

n = 484

n = 483

 

 Sedentary

2.547 (2.539–2.555)

2.497 (2.487–2.507)

−0.05**

 Light

2.694 (2.684–2.703)

2.667 (2.656–2.678)

−0.03**

 Moderate

2.881 (2.870–2.891)

2.852 (2.841–2.866)

−0.03**

 Vigorous

2.912 (2.902–2.923)

2.889 (2.875–2.901)

−0.02**

Walkability

n = 484

n = 483

 

 Sedentary

2.641 (2.631–2.650)

2.389 (2.377–2.399)

−0.25**

 Light

2.804 (2.793–2.815)

2.527 (2.517–2.540)

−0.28**

 Moderate

2.989 (2.977–3.002)

2.721 (2.707–2.732)

−0.27**

 Vigorous

3.013 (3.001–3.026)

2.757 (2.743–2.770)

−0.26**

Destinations

n = 484

n = 483

 

 Sedentary

2.689 (2.680–2.698)

2.319 (2.309–2.328)

−0.37**

 Light

2.878 (2.868–2.888)

2.430 (2.421–2.442)

−0.45**

 Moderate

3.077 (3.066–3.089)

2.604 (2.591–2.614)

−0.47**

 Vigorous

3.111 (3.100–3.123)

2.633 (2.620–2.643)

−0.48**

  1. aOdds ratio of recording physical activity inside the home neighbourhood relative to outside
  2. bDifference between the supportiveness groups; **p ≤ 0.001