Association between social cohesion and food insecurity among adults living in a healthcare region in southern Brazil

Table 2 Crude and adjusted prevalence ratio (PRs) of the association between the social cohesion score and food insecurity (n鈥�=鈥�400)

听	Model without adjustment		Model I		Model II
Variables	PR (95%CI)	p-value	PR (95%CI)	p-value	PR (95%CI)	p-value
Social Cohesion Score	n鈥�=鈥�400	听	n鈥�=鈥�400	听	n鈥�=鈥�400	听
Q1 (lower perception)	1	听	1	听	1	听
Q2	0.89 (0.711鈥�1.133)	听	0.91 (0.725鈥�1.155)	听	0.91 (0.724鈥�1.155)	听
Q3	0.67 (0.523鈥�0.870)	p鈥�&濒迟;鈥�0.001*	0.69 (0.543鈥�0.899)	0.007*	0.69 (0.536鈥�0.889)	0.005*
Q4 (greater perception)	0.65 (0.498鈥�0.868)	听	0.74 (0.566鈥�0.992)	听	0.73 (0.555鈥�0.975)	听
Age (years)	听	听	听	听	听	听
19鈥�49	1	听	1	听	1	听
50鈥�59	1.05 (0.867鈥�1.279)	p鈥�&濒迟;鈥�0.001*	1.09 (0.901鈥�1.323)	0.001*	1.11 (0.917鈥�1.346)	0.001*
&驳迟;鈥�60	0.47 (0.333鈥�0.688)	听	0.50 (0.351鈥�0.730	听	0.52 (0.355鈥�0.764)	听
Marital Status	听	听	听	听	听	听
With partner	1	听	1	听
Without a partner	0.85 (0.694鈥�1.051)	0.137	0.91 (0.748鈥�1.117)	0.294
Social benefit	听	听	听	听	听	听
None	1	听			1	听
BFP/CPB/others	1.41 (1.141鈥�1.746)	0.154			1.42 (1.159鈥�1.753)	0.735
Retirement/pension	0.82 (0.658鈥�1.042)	听			1.04 (0.827鈥�1.308)	听

PR, prevalence ratio; 95% CI, 95% confidence interval; Q1, quartile 1; Q2, quartile 2; Q3, quartile 3; Q4, quartile 4; BFP, Bolsa Fam铆lia Program; and CPB, Continuing Payment Benefit
Multivariate analysis was performed using Poisson regression with robust variance. *Significance at p鈥夆墹鈥�0.05
Variables associated with the outcome and with exposure at a significance level lower than 20% (p鈥�&濒迟;鈥�0.20)
Model without adjustment: effect of social cohesion without adjustment; Model 1: Adjusted for marital status and age; and Model 2: Adjusted for age and social benefit

ISSN: 1471-2458