4.1 Article

Effects of Eating Fast and Eating Before Bedtime on the Development of Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease

期刊

POPULATION HEALTH MANAGEMENT
卷 19, 期 4, 页码 279-283

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/pop.2015.0088

关键词

-

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology of Japan [25293160]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [25293160] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Few studies have evaluated the effects of lifestyle habits, such as eating behaviors, on the development of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). It is known that NAFLD increases the risk of type 2 diabetes, prediabetes, cardiovascular disease, and chronic kidney disease. Therefore, a retrospective cohort study was conducted to evaluate the effect of eating behaviors and interactions between these behaviors on the development of NAFLD among health insurance beneficiaries without NAFLD. Study subjects were 2254 male and female insurance beneficiaries without NAFLD who had attended specific health checkups during fiscal years 2009 and 2012 among health insurance societies located in Fukuoka and Shizuoka Prefectures (Japan). The incidence of NAFLD was defined as Fatty Liver Index scores >= 60 or visiting medical organizations for fatty liver disease treatment according to claims data. Eating behaviors, including eating speed and eating before bedtime, were evaluated by a self-administered questionnaire. During the study period, 52 (2.3%) subjects progressed to NAFLD. Subjects who ate before bedtime but did not eat fast had a higher risk of NAFLD (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 2.15; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.03-4.46). Those with both negative eating habits had a significantly higher risk of NAFLD (AOR = 2.48; 95% CI: 1.09-5.63). Subjects who habitually ate before bedtime, and those who ate fast and before bedtime, tended to have an increased risk of NAFLD. Earlier intervention to modify these poor eating behaviors could be useful to prevent NAFLD.

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

4.1
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