4.6 Article

Patterns of Recommended Dietary Behaviors Predict Subsequent Risk of Mortality in a Large Cohort of Men and Women in the United States

期刊

JOURNAL OF NUTRITION
卷 139, 期 7, 页码 1374-1380

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.3945/jn.109.104505

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recommendations for intake of fruits and vegetables, whole grains, lean meats, and low-fat dairy form the underpinning of dietary guidance for health promotion. We examined the association of a summary index of food consumption behaviors compatible with the spirit of prevailing dietary guidance and mortality. We used data from the NIH-American Association of Retired Persons cohort In = 350,886), aged 50-71 y and disease free at baseline in 1995-1996, to examine the association of a dietary behavior score (DIBS) with mortality after 10.5 y of follow-up (deaths, n = 29,838). The DBS included 6 equally weighted components derived from responses to questions on usual dietary behaviors related to consumption of fruits, vegetables, low-fat dairy, whole grains, lean meat and poultry, and discretionary fat. The covariate-adjusted association of DBS and mortality from all causes, cancer, and coronary heart disease was examined using Cox proportional hazards regression methods. Compared with those in the lowest one-fifth of DBS, the multivariate-adjusted relative risk of mortality in the highest one-fifth of the DBS was 0.75 (95% Cl, 0.70-0.80) in women and 0.79 (95% Cl, 0.75-0.83) in men (P-trend < 0.0001). The inverse association of DBS and mortality was significant in both genders in nearly all categories of covariates. Similar trends were observed for DBS associations with mortality from cancer and heart disease. Nearly 12% of the covariate-adjusted population risk of mortality was attributable to nonconformity with dietary recommendations. Adoption of recommended dietary behaviors was associated with lower mortality in both men and women independent of other lifestyle risk factors. J. Nutr. 139: 1374-1380, 2009.

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

4.6
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