Prevalence of outcomes in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes dependent on health-related behaviours and respective odds ratios.

aPercentage of patients with respective outcome.bP-value (χ2-Test).cOdds ratio estimated from ordinal logistic regression (proportional odds model) adjusted for age, sex and socioeconomic status, separate model for each health related behaviour.dP-value (Wald-χ2-Test).eMean Hba1c by health-related behaviour.fP-value (t-Test).gDifference estimated from linear regression adjusted for age, sex and socioeconomic status, separate model for each health related behaviour, dp-value (t-Test).hP-value (Wald-χ2-Test).iP-value (Score test for proportional odds assumption).jPhysically inactive youths were excluded.kAs in this model the proportional odds assumption was rejected, we also estimated ORs in a non-proportional odds model. The OR estimates for ≥1 and ≥2 severe hypoglycaemic events were 1.34 (95% CI 0.74; 2.44, p = 0.340) and 3.19 (95% CI 1.34; 7.44, p = 0.020), respectively.Prevalence of outcomes in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes dependent on health-related behaviours and respective odds ratios.a. 对应结局的患者占比。 b. 卡方检验（χ²-test）的P值。 c. 针对年龄、性别及社会经济地位校正的有序logistic回归（ordinal logistic regression）的比例优势模型（proportional odds model）所估算的比值比（odds ratio, OR），针对每种健康相关行为分别构建独立模型。 d. Wald卡方检验（Wald-χ²-test）的P值。 e. 按健康相关行为分组的糖化血红蛋白（HbA1c）均值。 f. t检验（t-test）的P值。 g. 经年龄、性别及社会经济地位校正的线性回归所估算的差值，针对每种健康相关行为分别构建独立模型，对应t检验的P值。 h. Wald卡方检验的P值。 i. 比例优势假设得分检验的P值。 j. 已排除体力活动不足的青少年。 k. 由于该模型的比例优势假设被拒绝，我们同时在非比例优势模型（non-proportional odds model）中估算了比值比。针对≥1次及≥2次严重低血糖事件的比值比估算值分别为1.34（95%置信区间（confidence interval, CI）：0.74~2.44，P=0.340）与3.19（95%置信区间：1.34~7.44，P=0.020）。 本数据集展示了1型糖尿病（type 1 diabetes）儿童及青少年的结局患病率随健康相关行为的变化情况，以及对应的比值比。