Skip to main content

Table 1 Characteristics of participants in the Fenland Study (n = 10,798), Cambridgeshire, UK, overall and stratified by genetic risk score for BMI (BMI-GRS)

From: Independent and combined associations between fast-food outlet exposure and genetic risk for obesity: a population-based, cross-sectional study in the UK

 

BMI-GRSa

All (n = 10,798)

Low (n = 5399)

High (n = 5399)

Mean BMI-GRS (SD)

2.2 (0.1)

2.4 (0.1)

2.3 (0.2)

Mean age, years (SD)

48.6 (7.4)

48.6 (7.5)

48.6 (7.5)

Men (n (%) of participants)

2548 (47.2)

2534 (46.9)

5082 (47.1)

Household income > £40,000 (n (%) of participants)

2781 (51.5)

2710 (50.2)

5491 (50.9)

Educational attainment, > 13 years (n (%) of participants)

1858 (34.4)

1763 (32.7)

3621 (33.5)

Car access, yes (n (%) of participants)

5065 (93.8)

5079 (94.1)

10,144 (93.9)

Health behaviours

 Current or ex-smoker (n (%) of participants)

2411 (44.7)

2584 (47.9)

4995 (46.3)

 Mean physical activity energy expenditure, kJ/kg/day (SD)

53.8 (22.0)

54.0 (22.1)

53.9 (22.0)

Food environment exposuresb

 Mean supermarket availability (SD)

2.1 (3.1)

2.0 (2.9)

2.0 (3.0)

 Mean fast-food outlet availability (SD)

9.0 (11.7)

8.5 (11.2)

8.8 (11.4)

Crude anthropometric outcomes

 Mean body mass index, kg/m2 (SD)

26.4 (4.6)

27.5 (5.0)

26.9 (4.8)

 Overweight, 25 ≥ BMI < 30 kg/m2 (n (%) of participants)

2101 (38.9)

2217 (41.1)

4318 (40.0)

 Obese, BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2 (n (%) of participants)

1001 (18.5)

1344 (24.9)

2345 (21.7)

Adjusted anthropometric outcomes

 Body mass index, β (95% CI)

  Model 1c

REF

1.11 (0.93, 1.29)**

–

  Model 2d

REF

1.06 (0.89 1.23)**

–

 Overweight, 25 kg/m2 ≥ BMI < 30 kg/m2, RR (95% CI)

  Model 1c

REF

1.34 (1.23, 1.46)**

–

  Model 2d

REF

1.34 (1.23, 1.47)**

–

 Obese, BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2, RR (95% CI)

  Model 1c

REF

1.69 (1.53, 1.88)**

–

  Model 2d

REF

1.73 (1.55, 1.93)**

–

  1. **P < 0.001
  2. aBMI-GRS, two groups split by sample median: low ≤ 2.29; high > 2.29
  3. bBased on counts of food outlets in home neighbourhoods
  4. cModel 1 adjusted for age and sex
  5. dModel 2 additionally adjusted for household income, highest educational attainment, car access, smoking status, physical activity energy expenditure, counts of supermarkets in home neighbourhoods, and counts of fast-food outlets in home neighbourhoods