4.6 Article

Glaucoma risk and the consumption of fruits and vegetables among older women in the study of osteoporotic fractures

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY
卷 145, 期 6, 页码 1081-1089

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2008.01.022

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIAMS NIH HHS [AR 35583, AR 35584, AR 35582] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIA NIH HHS [2R01 AG 027574-22A1, 2R01 AG 005394-22A1, AG 05394, AG 02004, AG 05407, R01 AG 005407, R01 AG 027576-22] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

PURPOSE: To explore the association between the consumption of fruits and vegetables and the presence of glaucoma. DESIGN: Cross-sectional cohort study. METHODS: In a sample of 1,155 women located in multiple centers in the United States, glaucoma specialists diagnosed glaucoma in at least one eye by assessing optic nerve head photographs and 76-point suprathreshold screening visual fields. Consumption of fruits and vegetables was assessed using the Block Food Frequency Questionnaire. The relationship between selected fruit and vegetable consumption and glaucoma was investigated using adjusted logistic regression models. RESULTS: Among 1,155 women, 95 (8.2%) were diagnosed with glaucoma. In adjusted analysis, the odds of glaucoma risk were decreased by 69% (odds ratio [OR], 0.31; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 0.11 to 0.91) in women who consumed at least one serving per month of green collards and kale compared with those who consumed fewer than one serving per month, by 64% (OR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.17 to 0.77) in women who consumed more than two servings per week of carrots compared with those who consumed fewer than one serving per week, and by 47% (OR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.29 to 0.97) in women who consumed at least one serving per week of canned or dried peaches compared with those who consumed fewer than one serving per month. CONCLUSIONS: A higher intake of certain fruits and vegetables may be associated with a decreased risk of glaucoma. More studies are needed to investigate this relationship.

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