Skip to main content

Table 2 Predicted change in Healthy Eating Index Score and Component Scores associated with changes in fruit and vegetable preference, cooking attitude, and cooking self-efficacy scores among 4th grade children

From: Child assessments of vegetable preferences and cooking self-efficacy show predictive validity with targeted diet quality measures

Predictor Variable Model 1a Model 2b
b SE(b) b SE(b)
Outcome Variable c
  Healthy Eating Index – 2010 (HEI)
Fruit and Vegetable Preferenced 0.172 0.092 0.178 0.109
Fruit Preferencee − 0.107 0.232 −0.179 0.283
Vegetable Preferencef 0.361 0.129 0.392 0.153
Cooking Attitudeg 0.648 0.353 0.609 0.398
Cooking Self-Efficacyh 0.595 0.172 0.667 0.209
  HEI Whole Fruit Component
Fruit and Vegetable Preference 0.023 0.014 0.021 0.016
Fruit Preference 0.036 0.036 0.019 0.039
Vegetable Preference 0.033 0.02 0.034 0.022
Cooking Attitude 0.099 0.052 0.091 0.057
Cooking Self-Efficacy 0.061 0.029 0.07 0.035
  HEI Total Vegetable Component
Fruit and Vegetable Preference 0.032 0.012 0.024 0.014
Fruit Preference 0.055 0.029 0.039 0.034
Vegetable Preference 0.044 0.017 0.034 0.020
Cooking Attitude 0.034 0.045 0.015 0.046
Cooking Self-Efficacy 0.059 0.022 0.052 0.027
  HEI Greens and Beans Component
Fruit and Vegetable Preference 0.032 0.014 0.03 0.017
Fruit Preference 0.008 0.037 0.009 0.042
Vegetable Preference 0.060 0.019 0.054 0.023
Cooking Attitude −0.014 0.056 −0.022 0.062
Cooking Self-Efficacy 0.028 0.025 0.014 0.032
  HEI Empty Calories Component
Fruit and Vegetable Preference 0.028 0.024 0.018 0.026
Fruit Preference 0.019 0.05 −0.028 0.047
Vegetable Preference 0.049 0.036 0.043 0.041
Cooking Attitude 0.034 0.068 0.024 0.066
Cooking Self-Efficacy 0.133 0.058 0.120 0.070
  1. a Linear regression adjusted for race/ethnicity and gender
  2. b Linear regression adjusted for race/ethnicity, gender, and BMI z-score
  3. c Total HEI score ranges from 0 to 100 points. HEI Whole Fruit, Total Vegetable, and Greens and Beans ranges from 0 to 5 points. HEI Empty Calories ranges from 0 to 20 points
  4. d For all outcomes: Model 1 n = 98, Model 2 n = 90; possible scores ranged from 18 to 90. Higher scores indicated greater preference
  5. e For all outcomes: Model 1 n = 101, Model 2 n = 93; possible scores ranged from 7 to 35. Higher scores indicated greater preference
  6. f For all outcomes: Model 1 n = 98, Model 2 n = 90; possible scores ranged from 11 to 55. Higher scores indicated greater preference
  7. g For all outcomes: Model 1 n = 101, Model 2 n = 93; possible scores ranged from 6 to 30. Higher scores indicated more positive cooking attitudes
  8. h For all outcomes: Model 1 n = 100, Model 2 n = 92; possible scores ranged from 8 to 40. Higher scores indicated greater cooking self-efficacy
  9. Bold indicates statistical significance with p < 0.05
  10. b = Regression Coefficient, SE = Standard Error, BMI = Body Mass Index