Table 3 Subgroup analysis of the impact of sex, race/ethnicity, and income level on NAFLD risk

From: Nonlinear relationship between body fat percentage and NAFLD mediated by METS-IR: threshold effects and subgroup differences

Variables

n (%)

OR (95% CI)

P

P for interaction

All patients

6281 (100.00)

1.11 (1.10–1.12)

< 0.001

 

Sex

   

< 0.001

Male

3131 (49.85)

1.32 (1.29–1.35)

< 0.001

 

Female

3150 (50.15)

1.45 (1.40–1.49)

< 0.001

 

Race

   

0.032

Mexican American

1058 (16.84)

1.09 (1.07–1.11)

< 0.001

 

Other Hispanic

646 (10.28)

1.10 (1.08–1.13)

< 0.001

 

Non- Hispanic White

2096 (33.37)

1.11 (1.10–1.13)

< 0.001

 

Non-Hispanic Black

1327 (21.13)

1.15 (1.13–1.16)

< 0.001

 

Other race

1154 (18.37)

1.11 (1.07–1.14)

< 0.001

 

PIR n (%)

   

0.020

< 1.0

1461 (25.34)

1.13 (1.11–1.15)

< 0.001

 

1.0–3.0

2360 (40.94)

1.12 (1.10–1.14)

< 0.001

 

> 3.0

1944 (33.72)

1.09 (1.08–1.11)

< 0.001

 

Education level n (%)

   

0.425

Below high school

288 (6.31)

1.09 (1.06–1.13)

< 0.001

 

High school

1532 (33.54)

1.10 (1.08–1.12)

< 0.001

 

Above high school

2747 (60.15)

1.11 (1.10–1.13)

< 0.001

 

METS_IR

   

0.124

≤ 39.12

3306 (52.63)

1.11 (1.05–1.17)

< 0.001

 

> 39.12

2975 (47.37)

1.06 (1.05–1.07)

< 0.001

 
  1. OR odds ratio, CI confidence interval