3.9 Article

Meal and snack patterns are associated with dietary intake of energy and nutrients in US adults

期刊

出版社

AMER DIETETIC ASSOC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jada.2005.09.045

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective This study was undertaken to test the hypothesis that specific meal and snack patterns are associated with selected nutrient intakes in US adults. Design Using the 24-hour dietary recall from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, meal and snack patterns were described in relation to nutrient intakes. Subjects The study included US adults aged 20 years or older (n=15,978). Statistical analyses performed All statistical analyses accounted for the survey design and sample weights. Linear regression analyses controlled for confounding factors, including energy intakes. Wald F tests were used for determination of significance between means of nutrient intakes by daily eating frequency or meal pattern groups. Results Daily eating frequency was positively related to carbohydrate, folic acid, vitamin C, calcium, magnesium, iron, potassium, and fiber intakes and inversely related to protein, total fat, cholesterol, and sodium intakes. Meal patterns were further categorized into the five most commonly reported meal and snack combinations by population percentages including breakfast (B), lunch (L), dinner (D), and >= 2 snacks (S) (31.6%); B, L, D and 1 S (15.4%); B, D and >= 2 S (13.1%); B, L, D (8.3%); and L, D and >= 2 S (7.6%). Groups reporting B, L, D and 1 S and B, L, D and >= 2 S had the highest intakes of all micronutrients examined except cholesterol, vitamin B-6, and sodium. Breakfast skippers (L, D and >= 2 S) had the lowest intakes of all micronutrients examined except sodium. Conclusions Findings from this cross-sectional survey suggest that meal and snack patterns may be markers for nutrient intakes and therefore diet quality. Complete nutrient intakes should be considered in investigations of meal patterns and health outcomes.

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