Associations of Cardiorespiratory Fitness and Fatness with Metabolic Syndrome in Rural Women with Prehypertension

Table 3

Logistic regressions predicting metabolic syndrome by unfit/fat and fit/fat categories using two body composition methods.

	Cases	b	OR	95% CI	P
	Model 1—fit/fat categories defining obesity by percent body fat
Unfit/fat	78/188 (41.5%)		1
Fit/fat	12/85 (14.1%)	−1.39	0.25	0.12–0.52	<0.001
	Model 2—fit/fat categories defining obesity by revised BMI cut-score
Unfit/fat	78/179 (43.6%)		1
Fit/fat	12/57 (21.1%)	−0.90	0.41	0.19–0.87	0.02

“Fat” was defined as body fat cut-score ≥30% and as ≥25 kg/m² for revised BMI obesity cut-score.
“Fit” was >25 mL/kg/min. Both models were adjusted for age, education, and household income.
Both models excluded women classified as “Not-Fat” as there were no cases of Metabolic Syndrome in women classified as “Not-Fat”.
Nagelkerke R square was 0.07 and 0.11 for Models 1 and 2, respectively.