This initial association remained highly significant after adjustment for demographic characteristics in Model 2, though the effect size was modestly attenuated to an OR of 1.43 (95% CI: 1.17–1.75, P < 0.001), accompanied by a substantial improvement in model fit as evidenced by AIC reduction from 4523.6 to 3842.5.
Physical activity status demonstrated marginally non-significant interaction (P-interaction = 0.089), with physically inactive individuals exhibiting significant elevated risk (OR = 1.51, 95% CI: 1.11–2.06, P = 0.009; 4.8% prevalence) versus no association among active participants (OR = 1.19, 95% CI: 0.93–1.53, P = 0.167; 3.1% prevalence), highlighting lifestyle modification as potential risk mitigation strategy.
Sex-specific analyses revealed non-significant heterogeneity (P-interaction = 0.412), though point estimates suggested potential differences, with males showing borderline significant association (OR = 1.35, 95% CI: 1.02–1.79, P = 0.037; 3.8% prevalence) compared to non-significant effects in females (OR = 1.24, 95% CI: 0.94–1.64, P = 0.129; 3.2% prevalence).