4.7 Review

Design, Development and Construct Validation of the Children's Dietary Inflammatory Index

Journal

NUTRIENTS
Volume 10, Issue 8, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/nu10080993

Keywords

diet; inflammation; children's-dietary inflammatory index

Funding

  1. United States Department of Agriculture [USDA 12011784]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To design and validate a literature-derived, population-based Children's Dietary Inflammatory Index (C-DII)(TM). Design: The C-DII was developed based on a review of literature through 2010. Dietary data obtained from children in 16 different countries were used to create a reference database for computing C-DII scores based on consumption of macronutrients, vitamins, minerals, and whole foods. Construct validation was performed using quantile regression to assess the association between C-reactive protein (CRP) concentrations and C-DII scores. Data Sources: All data used for construct validation were obtained from children between six and 14 years of age (n = 3300) who participated in the U.S. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) (2005-2010). Results: The C-DII was successfully validated with blood CRP concentrations in this heterogeneous sample of 3300 children from NHANES (52% male; 29% African American, 25% Mexican American; mean age 11 years). The final model was adjusted for sex, age, race, asthma, body mass index (BMI), and infections. Children in level 3 (i.e., quartiles 3 and 4 combined) of the C-DII (i.e., children with the most pro-inflammatory diets) had a CRP value 0.097 mg/dL higher than that in level 1 (i.e., quartile 1) for CRP values at the 75th percentile of CRP using quantile regression (p < 0.05). Conclusion: The C-DII predicted blood CRP concentrations among children 6-14 years in the NHANES. Further construct validation with CRP and other inflammatory markers is required to deepen understanding of the relationship between the C-DII and markers of inflammation in children.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available