Skip to main content

Table 3 Odds ratios for overweight per z-score increase in weight for length for each of the five sets of models, as estimated using standardised residuals for each of the exposures. The ORs are also adjusted for gestational age and sex

From: Regression models for linking patterns of growth to a later outcome: infant growth and childhood overweight

  OR 95 % CI p
(a) Conditional growth:    
 Birth to 6w 1.32 1.10, 1.57 0.002
 6w to 3 m 1.19 1.00, 1.42 0.049
 3 to 6 m 1.48 1.24, 1.78 <0.001
 6 to 12 m 1.3 1.09, 1.56 0.004
 12 to 24 m 1.32a 1.10, 1.58 0.003
(b) Being bigger:    
 At birth 1.31 1.10, 1.56 0.003
 birth to 6w 1.45 1.22, 1.73 <0.001
 birth to 3 m 1.51 1.27, 1.81 <0.001
 birth to 6 m 1.64 1.37, 1.97 <0.001
 birth to 12 m 1.72 1.43, 2.07 <0.001
 birth to 24 m 1.83 1.52, 2.22 <0.001
(c) Becoming bigger and staying bigger:    
 Birth to 6w 1.71 1.41, 2.07 <0.001
 6w to 3 m 1.42 1.18, 1.71 <0.001
 3 to 6 m 1.62 1.35, 1.95 <0.001
 6 to 12 m 1.41 1.18, 1.69 <0.001
 12 to 24 m 1.32a 1.10, 1.58 0.003
(d) Growing faster v being bigger:    
 Birth to 6w 0.89 0.75, 1.06 0.19
 6w to 3 m 0.87 0.73, 1.03 0.11
 3 to 6 m 1.03 0.86, 1.23 0.8
 6 to 12 m 0.86 0.72, 1.03 0.01
 12 to 24 m 0.79b 0.66, 0.94 0.01
(e) Becoming bigger v being bigger:    
 Birth to 6w 0.91 0.76, 1.09 0.30
 6w to 3 m 0.88 0.74, 1.05 0.14
 3 to 6 m 1.03 0.87, 1.23 0.7
 6 to 12 m 0.89 0.75, 1.06 0.19
 12 to 24 m 0.79b 0.66, 0.94 0.01
  1. ait is no coincidence that these two coefficients are exactly the same, they are the same contrast (see Fig. 1a & c)
  2. bit is no coincidence that these two coefficients are exactly the same, they are the same contrast (see Fig. 1d and e)