Table 3

Logistic regression examining associations between parent TV and child viewing timea
All children Sons Daughters
Weekday N OR [95% CI] N OR [95% CI] N OR [95% CI] P for heterogeneityb
Fathers: Model 1c 487 3.4 [1.8 to 6.5] 267 2.8 [1.1 to 7.2] 220 4.7 [1.7 to 13.2] 0.496
Fathers: Model 2d 487 3.4 [1.8 to 6.7] 267 2.7 [1.0 to 7.0] 220 6.0 [2.3 to 15.7] 0.407
Mothers: Model 1 784 3.9 [2.5 to 6.1] 401 4.0 [2.1 to 7.8] 383 3.7 [1.6 to 8.6] 0.895
Mothers: Model 2 784 3.7 [2.3 to 5.7] 401 3.8 [2.0 to 7.2] 383 3.4 [1.4 to 8.3] 0.858
Weekend
Fathers: Model 1 486 4.5 [3.0 to 7.0] 266 3.4 [2.0 to 5.8] 220 7.0 [4.1 to 12.2] 0.035
Fathers: Model 2 486 4.8 [3.2 to 7.3] 266 3.8 [2.2 to 6.4] 220 7.9 [4.5 to 14.0] 0.049
Mothers: Model 1 781 4.7 [3.7 to 6.1] 401 4.1 [2.7 to 6.2] 380 5.6 [3.7 to 8.5] 0.355
Mothers: Model 2 781 4.7 [3.6 to 6.1] 401 4.0 [2.7 to 6.2] 380 5.4 [3.5 to 8.4] 0.382

a>2 hrs. vs 2 hrs or less.

bTesting that associations are different in daughters and by sons; tested by adding an interaction term (parent exposure variable*child gender) into the regression model.

cModel 1: Unadjusted association.

dModel 2: Adjusted for child’s BMI-z score parent’s age, parent’s BMI, and household IMD.

Jago et al.

Jago et al. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity 2014 11:54   doi:10.1186/1479-5868-11-54

Open Data