3.9 Article

Serum Carotenoid and Tocopherol Concentrations Vary by Dietary Pattern among African Americans

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN DIETETIC ASSOCIATION
卷 108, 期 12, 页码 2013-2020

出版社

AMER DIETETIC ASSOC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jada.2008.09.004

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [N0-1-HC-95170, N01-HC-95171, N01-HC-95172]
  2. US Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service [6251-53000-003-00D, 58-1950-7-707]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Intakes and biochemical concentrations of carotenoids and tocopherols have been associated with chronic diseases. Objective To describe dietary patterns in Jackson Heart Study participants and to determine if biochemical measurements of antioxidants differ across these. Design Cross-sectional analysis of data for 373 African-American men and women (age 35 to 80 years), participating in the Diet and Physical Activity Substudy of the Jackson Heart Study. Methods Dietary intake was assessed with a region specific food frequency questionnaire. Patterns were defined by cluster analysis of food groups, as percent of energy intake. Results Four dietary patterns were identified: fast food, Southern, prudent, and juice. Individuals in the fast-food pattern (n = 153) had significantly lower serum concentrations of lutein plus zeaxanthin and beta-cryptoxanthin; those in the Southern cluster (n=99) had significantly lower serum a-carotene; and those in the prudent (n=63) and juice (n = 58) clusters had significantly higher serum a-carotene and beta-cryptoxanthin (P<0.05) relative to those in at least one other cluster (all P<0.05). The juice cluster also had higher serum a-tocopherol concentrations relative to the fast-food cluster. Conclusions Diets high in fast foods, snacks, soft drinks, and meat were associated with relatively low concentrations of carotenoids and a-tocopherol. This pattern contained the largest number of participants, and could contribute to the extensive health disparities seen in this region.

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

3.9
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