Regression coefficients and standard errors estimated from interactions between bereavement and socio-demographic variables on BMI.

<p>The outcome was the BMI (kg/m²) in LNU 2000 - The Swedish Level of Living Survey.*The reference categories for the analysis are women for gender, non-manual for social class and no bereaved for all bereavement variables. The models were fitted separately by bereavement variables and social demographic ones. The models were adjusted by marital status, number of sibling and emotional support. ^ap<0.001; ^bp<0.05; β =  coefficient estimated SE =  estimation error.</p

Regression coefficients and standard errors estimated from multiple linear regressions for the association between bereavement time or frequency and BMI.

<p>The outcome was the BMI (kg/m²) in LNU 2000. The covariates were included based on informations provided by LNU 2000. The Swedish Level of Living Survey. The models were fitted separately by bereavement variable (reference group in bereavement variables: individuals who have not had such bereavement experiences).</p>a<p>p<0.001; ^bp<0.05; ^cp<0.10 n =  number of observations; β =  coefficient estimated; SE =  estimation error.</p><p>Model 1: Bereavement variable.</p><p>Model 2: Bereavement variable + sex + age + social class.</p><p>Model 3: Bereavement variable + marital status + age + social class + marital status.</p><p>Model 4: Bereavement variable + marital status + age + social class + marital status + number of siblings.</p><p>Model 5: Bereavement variable + age + social class + marital status + number of siblings + emotional support.</p

Distribution of the study variables.

<p>ELANA study, 2010 and 2012.</p

Structural equation modeling results and estimates (standardized) between HRBS and body bullying for boys/girls.

<p>*** p < .001, ** p < .01, * p < .05. Boys N = 436 and girls N = 374. All models were adjusted by socioeconomic information and psychological well-being- omitted in the Fig 2.</p

Baseline, forward causation, reversed causation and reciprocal models for HRSB and body bullying.

<p>A. Model 1: Auto-regressive effects and cross-sectional correlations; B. Model 2: Body bullying at T1 predicts HRSB at T2; C. Model 3: HRSB at T1 predict body bullying at T2; D. Model 4: Body bullying and HRSB have reciprocal effect. All models were adjusted by socioeconomic information and psychological well-being- omitted in the Fig 1.</p

Goodness-of fit statistics for the tested models (n = 810).

<p>ELANA study, 2010 and 2012.</p