4.7 Article

Dietary patterns and the risk of mortality: impact of cardiorespiratory fitness

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
卷 39, 期 1, 页码 197-209

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/ije/dyp191

关键词

All-cause mortality; cardiorespiratory fitness; reduced rank regression

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [AG06945, HL62508]
  2. Canadian Institutes of Health Research
  3. Ontario Ministry of Research and Innovation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background While dietary patterns that are both predictive of chronic disease and mortality have been identified, the confounding effects of cardiorespiratory fitness have not been properly addressed. The primary objective was to assess the relation between dietary patterns with all-cause mortality, while controlling for the potentially confounding effects of fitness. Methods This was a prospective cohort study. Participants consisted of 13621 men and women from the Aerobics Center Longitudinal Study (ACLS). Participants completed a clinical exam and 3-day diet record between 1987 and 1999. Participants were followed for mortality until 2003. Reduced rank regression (RRR) was used to identify dietary patterns that predicted unfavourable total and high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol, triglyceride, glucose, blood pressure, uric acid, white blood cell and body mass index values. Results One primary dietary pattern emerged and was labelled the Unhealthy Eating Index. This pattern was characterized by elevated consumption of processed and red meat, white potato products, non-whole grains, added fat and reduced consumption of non-citrus fruits. The hazard ratio for all-cause mortality in the fifth vs the first quintile of the Unhealthy Eating Index was 1.40 (1.021.91). This risk estimate was reduced by 13.5 and 55.0% after controlling for self-reported physical activity and fitness, respectively. Conclusion In this study the association between diet and overall mortality was, in large part, confounded by fitness.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据