Derenik-H
commented
2 years ago To assess the effect of the imbalances in the number of canteen visits per each student, we estimated the odds of not attending the canteen (i.e., having a missing value) for a given menu day using a GLME logistic regression model, summarized in \textbf{????? Table ?????}. The estimated association between ordering at least one vegetable item and the odds of missing a canteen visit was statistically significant; however, the magnitude was very small (estimate = $0.98$, p-value = $0.018$). The three non-standard labels tended to be associated with a student having a lower odds of not attending the canteen compared to on a menu day with a standard label. For example, we estimated the odds of missing a menu day was $59\%$ lower (OR = $0.41$; $95\%$ confidence interval: $(0.23, 0.72)$) for a typical student on a menu day with an organic-sustainable label compared to a typical student on a standard label day, both of whom are similar with respect to sex, age, education, nationality, and odds of ordering at least one vegetable item per menu day. $$ \begin{table} \begin{tabular}{lccc} \hline \textbf{Characteristic} & \textbf{Odds Ratio} & \textbf{95\% CI} & \textbf{p-value} \ \hline Organic vs Standard & 0.47 & (0.26, 0.86) & 0.014 \ Sustainable vs Standard & 0.56 & (0.30, 1.07) & 0.078 \ Both vs Standard & 0.41 & (0.23, 0.72) & 0.002 \ Male vs Female & 1.09 & (0.91, 1.30) & 0.354 \ Age & 0.99 & (0.98, 1.01) & 0.416 \ Graduate vs Undergraduate & 0.86 & (0.70, 1.04) & 0.119 \ Italian vs Foreigner & 1.20 & (1.00, 1.45) & 0.055 \ Odds of ordering $\geq 1$ vegetable item & 0.98 & (0.97, 1.00) & 0.018 \ \hline \end{tabular} \caption{GLME logistic regression estimates of the relative odds of missing a menu day, along with the corresponding $95\%$ confidence intervals.} \end{table}$$
To assess the effect of the imbalances in the number of canteen visits per each student, we estimated the odds of not attending the canteen (i.e., having a missing value) for a given menu day using a GLME logistic regression model, summarized in \textbf{????? Table ?????}. The estimated association between ordering at least one vegetable item and the odds of missing a canteen visit was statistically significant; however, the magnitude was very small (estimate = $0.98$, p-value = $0.018$). The three non-standard labels tended to be associated with a student having a lower odds of not attending the canteen compared to on a menu day with a standard label. For example, we estimated the odds of missing a menu day was $59\%$ lower (OR = $0.41$; $95\%$ confidence interval: $(0.23, 0.72)$) for a typical student on a menu day with an organic-sustainable label compared to a typical student on a standard label day, both of whom are similar with respect to sex, age, education, nationality, and odds of ordering at least one vegetable item per menu day.
\begin{table} \begin{tabular}{lccc} \hline \textbf{Characteristic} & \textbf{Odds Ratio} & \textbf{95\% CI} & \textbf{p-value} \ \hline Organic vs Standard & 0.47 & (0.26, 0.86) & 0.014 \ Sustainable vs Standard & 0.56 & (0.30, 1.07) & 0.078 \ Both vs Standard & 0.41 & (0.23, 0.72) & 0.002 \ Male vs Female & 1.09 & (0.91, 1.30) & 0.354 \ Age & 0.99 & (0.98, 1.01) & 0.416 \ Graduate vs Undergraduate & 0.86 & (0.70, 1.04) & 0.119 \ Italian vs Foreigner & 1.20 & (1.00, 1.45) & 0.055 \ Odds of ordering $\geq 1$ vegetable item & 0.98 & (0.97, 1.00) & 0.018 \ \hline \end{tabular} \caption{GLME logistic regression estimates of the relative odds of missing a menu day, along with the corresponding $95\%$ confidence intervals.} \end{table}