Page 87 - ON THE WAY TO HEALTHIER SCHOOL CANTEENS - Irma Evenhuis

1.27 (95% CI 0.75–2.17) for purchases in vending machines in boys (Table 5.6). Adjustment for demographic (model 2), behavioural (model 3) and environmental variables (model 4) again did not materially change the results.
Table 5.5. Mixed logistic regression analyses of the effect of the intervention (ref. group is control group) on changes in purchase behaviour.
Purchases cafeteriaa
Purchases vending machinea
Boys (n=548) Girls (n=665)
Boys (n=542) Girls (n=675)
0.92 0.62; 1.36 0.94 1.29 0.85; 1.96 1.29
1.02 0.62; 1.67 1.00 0.84 0.62; 1.14 0.81
0.67; 1.32 0.83; 1.96
0.60; 1.67 0.59; 1.11
Model 1b
OR 95% CI OR
Model 2c 95% CI
Model 3d OR 95% CI
0.96 0.68; 1.35 1.31 0.85; 2.02
1.03 0.62; 1.69 0.85 0.61; 1.19
Model 4e OR 95% CI
0.92 0.63; 1.34 1.30 0.85; 2.00
1.03 0.62; 1.71 0.85 0.58; 1.23
a Dichotomous outcome: Healthier vs. less healthy
b Model 1 = Mixed logistic regression analysis, corrected for school.
c Model 2 = Model 1, plus corrected for demographic variables (age, education).
d Model 3 = Model 2, plus corrected for behavioural determinants (attitude, subjective norm, perceived
behavioural control, intention). 5 e Model 4 = Model 3, plus corrected for environmental determinants (amount of money spent in school p/w,
breakfast, food purchases outside school, drink purchases outside school, food brought from home, drinks
brought from home).
Table 5.6. Mixed logistic regression analyses to the effect of a healthier canteen (ref. group not healthy) on changes in purchase behaviour.
changes in purchases over time.
Model 1e
OR 95% CI OR
Model 2f 95% CI
Model 3g OR 95% CI
1.03 0.69; 1.53 1.14 0.70; 1.88
1.18 0.68; 2.03 1.18 0.79; 1.75
1.19 0.83; 1.70 0.90 0.62; 1.30
Model 4h OR 95% CI
1.01 0.66; 1.55 1.13 0.69; 1.86
1.21 0.69; 2.12 1.15 0.75; 1.78
1.14 0.79; 1.65 0.90 0.61; 1.34
Purchases cafeteriaab
Purchases vending machineac
Purchases cafeteria and vending machinead
Boys (n=548) Girls (n=665)
Boys (n=542) Girls (n=675)
Boys (n=620) Girls (n=756)
0.93 0.60; 1.44 1.02 1.13 0.70; 1.83 1.14
1.27 0.75; 2.17 1.18 1.06 0.74; 1.50 1.14
1.17 0.84; 1.62 1.19 0.87 0.61; 1.26 0.89
0.69; 1.52 0.70; 1.86
0.67; 2.05 0.77; 1.69
0.83; 1.73 0.61; 1.28
a Dichotomous outcome: Healthier vs. less healthy
b Healthier canteen, measured with the subtopic healthier products available in cafeteria (≥60%, <60% (ref. group)).
c Healthier canteen, measured with the subtopic healthier products available at vending machines (≥60%, <60% (ref. group)).
d Healthier canteen, measured with the subtopic fulfilled healthier accessibility criteria (≥60%, <60% (ref. group)). e Model 1 = Mixed logistic regression analysis, corrected for school.
f Model 2 = Model 1, plus corrected for demographic variables (age, education).
g Model 3 = Model 2, plus corrected for behavioural determinants (attitude, subjective norm, perceived behavioural control, intention).
changes in purchases over time.
85