| Literature DB >> 29644959 |
Sander Biesbroek1, Mirjam C Kneepkens1, Saskia W van den Berg1, Heidi P Fransen2, Joline W Beulens2, Petra H M Peeters2, Jolanda M A Boer1.
Abstract
Higher-educated people often have healthier diets, but it is unclear whether specific dietary patterns exist within educational groups. We therefore aimed to derive dietary patterns in the total population and by educational level and to investigate whether these patterns differed in their composition and associations with the incidence of fatal and non-fatal CHD and stroke. Patterns were derived using principal components analysis in 36 418 participants of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition-Netherlands cohort. Self-reported educational level was used to create three educational groups. Dietary intake was estimated using a validated semi-quantitative FFQ. Hazard ratios were estimated using Cox Proportional Hazard analysis after a mean follow-up of 16 years. In the three educational groups, similar 'Western', 'prudent' and 'traditional' patterns were derived as in the total population. However, with higher educational level a lower population-derived score for the 'Western' and 'traditional' patterns and a higher score on the 'prudent' pattern were observed. These differences in distribution of the factor scores illustrate the association between education and food consumption. After adjustments, no differences in associations between population-derived dietary patterns and the incidence of CHD or stroke were found between the educational groups (P interaction between 0·21 and 0·98). In conclusion, although in general population and educational groups-derived dietary patterns did not differ, small differences between educational groups existed in the consumption of food groups in participants considered adherent to the population-derived patterns (Q4). This did not result in different associations with incident CHD or stroke between educational groups.Entities:
Keywords: EPIC-NL European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition-Netherlands; PCA principal component analysis; SES socio-economic status; CVD; Dietary patterns; Education; Principal component analysis; Socio-economic status
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29644959 PMCID: PMC6088537 DOI: 10.1017/S0007114518000569
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Br J Nutr ISSN: 0007-1145 Impact factor: 3.718
Baseline characteristics according to educational level in European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition-Netherlands (Mean values and standard deviations; percentages and frequencies; mean values with their standard errors)
| Low education ( | Medium education ( | High education ( | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Characteristics | Mean or % |
| Mean or % |
| Mean or % |
|
| Cohort: prospect | 50·7 | 7266 | 41·1 | 6015 | 34·8 | 2596 |
| Age (years) | 52·4 | 10·5 | 47·2 | 12·8 | 46·5 | 11·0 |
| Male (sex) | 21·0 | 3002 | 25·2 | 3686 | 33·6 | 2501 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 26·7 | 4·2 | 25·3 | 3·8 | 24·4 | 3·3 |
| Smoking | ||||||
| Former | 28·5 | 4079 | 32·1 | 4699 | 34·5 | 2566 |
| Current | 32·7 | 4684 | 30·1 | 4409 | 26·5 | 1971 |
| Physical activity | ||||||
| Moderately inactive | 24·3 | 3475 | 25·2 | 3686 | 24·5 | 1829 |
| Moderately active | 23·4 | 3353 | 26·7 | 3912 | 29·8 | 2224 |
| Active | 43·4 | 6216 | 41·5 | 6065 | 40·2 | 2997 |
| Hypertension | 24·1 | 3449 | 20·2 | 2953 | 17·8 | 1327 |
| Hyperlipidaemia | 9·2 | 1318 | 7·2 | 1052 | 6·63 | 494 |
| Diabetes | 2·6 | 377 | 1·5 | 212 | 0·8 | 59 |
| Dietary pattern factor scores | ||||||
| ‘Western pattern’ | ||||||
| Mean | 0·01 | 0·03 | −0·09 | |||
|
| 0·007 | 0·006 | 0·009 | |||
| ‘Prudent pattern’ | ||||||
| Mean | −0·18 | 0·06 | 0·24 | |||
|
| 0·008 | 0·007 | 0·011 | |||
| ‘Traditional pattern’ | ||||||
| Mean | 0·34 | −0·08 | −0·49 | |||
|
| 0·008 | 0·008 | 0·011 | |||
n 8, n 8 and n 3 missing for low, medium and high education, respectively.
n 8, n 7 and n 8 missing for low, medium and high education, respectively.
Adjusted for age, sex and cohort.
Fig. 1Radar charts of the component loadings of the ‘Western’ (a), ‘prudent’ (b) and ‘traditional’ (c) dietary pattern derived through principal component analysis per educational group and in the total population. Only food groups with a factor loading >0·20 or <−0·20 in at least one of the educational groups are presented. * Includes legumes. , Low education; , medium education; , high education; , total population.
Association between principal component analysis (PCA)-derived dietary patterns and incident CHD and stroke* (Adjusted hazard ratios (HR) and 95 % confidence intervals)
| Stratified by educational level
(continuous (per | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Continuous (per | Low education | Medium education | High education |
| |||||
| HR | 95 % CI | HR | 95 % CI | HR | 95 % CI | HR | 95 % CI | (SES×dietary pattern score) | |
| ‘Western’ | |||||||||
| CHD | |||||||||
| Model 1 | 1·06 | 1·00, 1·12 | 1·02 | 0·95, 1·10 | 1·14 | 1·04, 1·25 | 1·05 | 0·91, 1·22 | 0·41 |
| Model 2 | 1·00 | 0·95, 1·05 | 0·96 | 0·89, 1·03 | 1·09 | 0·99, 1·19 | 1·00 | 0·86, 1·16 | 0·21 |
| Stroke | |||||||||
| Model 1 | 1·09 | 1·01, 1·18 | 1·06 | 0·95, 1·18 | 1·19 | 1·05, 1·35 | 0·95 | 0·77, 1·18 | 0·36 |
| Model 2 | 1·03 | 0·95, 1·12 | 1·00 | 0·90, 1·12 | 1·12 | 0·98, 1·27 | 0·91 | 0·73, 1·12 | 0·43 |
| ‘Prudent’ | |||||||||
| CHD | |||||||||
| Model 1 | 1·05 | 1·01, 1·09 | 1·03 | 0·97, 1·09 | 1·10 | 1·03, 1·18 | 1·01 | 0·91, 1·13 | 0·98 |
| Model 2 | 1·02 | 0·98, 1·07 | 0·99 | 0·93, 1·06 | 1·10 | 1·02, 1·18 | 1·01 | 0·89, 1·13 | 0·74 |
| Stroke | |||||||||
| Model 1 | 0·99 | 0·94, 1·05 | 1·03 | 0·95, 1·12 | 0·95 | 0·86, 1·04 | 0·97 | 0·94, 1·14 | 0·61 |
| Model 2 | 0·96 | 0·90, 1·02 | 1·01 | 0·93, 1·11 | 0·91 | 0·82, 1·01 | 0·90 | 0·77, 1·07 | 0·44 |
| ‘Traditional’ | |||||||||
| CHD | |||||||||
| Model 1 | 1·15 | 1·10, 1·20 | 1·18 | 1·11, 1·25 | 1·09 | 1·01, 1·18 | 1·12 | 1·00, 1·27 | 0·33 |
| Model 2 | 1·09 | 1·04, 1·14 | 1·11 | 1·04, 1·18 | 1·05 | 0·97, 1·14 | 1·10 | 0·97, 1·25 | 0·48 |
| Stroke | |||||||||
| Model 1 | 1·15 | 1·08, 1·22 | 1·18 | 1·08, 1·29 | 1·12 | 1·01, 1·24 | 1·13 | 0·96, 1·33 | 0·40 |
| Model 2 | 1·09 | 1·02, 1·16 | 1·12 | 1·02, 1·22 | 1·05 | 0·95, 1·18 | 1·09 | 0·92, 1·28 | 0·47 |
* Model 1: adjusted for age and sex (and educational level in the whole population). Model 2: model 1 with additional adjustment for smoking status, physical activity and kJ (kcal).