Summary of results of multivariate logistic regression models to predict school-level fundraising practices.

a<p>All models include school-level covariates: school size (ref: large), locale (ref: city) region (ref: south), student race/ethnicity (ref: majority white), percentage of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch (ref: lowest), and year (ref: 2009–10).</p>b<p>Adjusted prevalence represents the percentage of schools with a restriction on fundraising, by state/district policy status, adjusted for all covariates noted above.</p><p>Outcomes coded 1 = school-level restriction, 0 = no school-level restriction.</p><p>Data include the 2009–10 and 2010–11 school years, analyses weighted to the school level, n = 1215 schools.</p>*<p><i>P</i><.05.</p>***<p><i>P</i><.001.</p

Percentage of schools with any school-level fundraising policy or no policy, by school demographic characteristics, for schools where both state laws and district-level fundraising policies are present, and those where policies are absent.

<p>Percentage of schools with any school-level fundraising policy or no policy, by school demographic characteristics, for schools where both state laws and district-level fundraising policies are present, and those where policies are absent.</p

Percentages of schools in districts and/or states with policies/laws restricting school fundraising activities, 2009–11 school years.

<p>Percentages sum to 100 within category, but due to rounding may not sum to exactly 100.</p><p>Data are weighted to the school level, n = 1215 schools.</p

Characteristics of the school sample, 2009–11 school years.

<p>Percentages sum to 100 within category, but due to rounding may not sum to exactly 100.</p><p>Data are weighted to the school level, n = 1215 schools.</p

bridge, the

bridge n...the front porch is called'the bridge.'the front porchPRINTED ITEMUsed I and SupUsed I and Sup4Not use

Relative Food Prices and Obesity in U.S. Metropolitan Areas: 1976-2001

<p>Pseudo-panel by race and gender</p

Relative Food Prices and the Obesity Prevalence in Metropolitan Areas: 1976–2001.

<p>Source: Authors’ calculation using consumer price indexes from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and NHIS respondents living in metropolitan areas.</p

The Estimated Effects of Relative Food Price Changes on Obesity.

<p>Notes: ^a: All models are estimated using the first difference approach and based on weighted aggregate samples from the NHIS for years 1976 to 2001. ^b: All regressions control for changes in demographic variables, including marital status, age and family income, as well as year fixed effects. Robust standard errors clustered at the metropolitan level in parentheses. ***<i>p</i><0.01, **<i>p</i><0.05, *<i>p</i><0.</p><p>The Estimated Effects of Relative Food Price Changes on Obesity.</p

The Fixed Effect Estimates of Relative Food Price on Body Weight Measures.

<p>Notes: ^a: All models are estimated using the fixed effect approach and based on weighted aggregate samples from the NHIS for years 1976 to 2001. ^b: All regressions control for demographic variables, including marital status, age and family income, indicators of gender, race/ethnicity, and education, as well as year and metropolitan fixed effects. Robust standard errors clustered at the metropolitan level in parentheses. ***<i>p</i><0.01, **<i>p</i><0.05, *<i>p</i><0.1.</p><p>The Fixed Effect Estimates of Relative Food Price on Body Weight Measures.</p

The Estimated Effects of Relative Food Price Changes on BMI.

<p>Notes: ^a: All models are estimated using the first difference approach and based on weighted aggregate samples from the NHIS for years 1976 to 2001. ^b: All regressions control for changes in demographic variables, including marital status, age and family income, as well as year fixed effects. Robust standard errors clustered at the metropolitan level in parentheses. ***<i>p</i><0.01, **<i>p</i><0.05, *<i>p</i><0.1.</p><p>The Estimated Effects of Relative Food Price Changes on BMI.</p