| Literature DB >> 31467800 |
Marquita S Gray1, Sindhu Lakkur1, Virginia J Howard2, Keith Pearson3, James M Shikany4, Monika Safford5, Orlando M Gutiérrez2,4, Natalie Colabianchi6, Suzanne E Judd1.
Abstract
Increased interest in determining areas in need of improved food access led the U.S Department of Agriculture (USDA) to define food desert census tracts; however, no nationwide studies have compared dietary patterns in food desert tracts to other tracts. Our objective was to examine dietary patterns in residents of food desert and non-food desert census tracts. We performed a cross-sectional analysis of 19,179 participants in the REasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) study enrolled January 2003-October 2007. We used participants' geocoded address with USDA Food Desert Locator to identify food deserts and multivariable-adjusted odds ratios (ORs) to calculate adherence to Southern, Plant-based, and Mediterranean dietary patterns. Odds of adherence to the Southern dietary pattern were higher among white high school graduates (OR=1.41; 95% CI: 1.20-1.67), white college graduates (OR=1.91; 95% CI: 1.55-2.35) and black college graduates (OR=1.38; 95% CI: 1.14-1.68) who reside in a food desert versus non-food desert. Odds of adherence to the Plant-based dietary pattern were 15% lower among non-southeastern residents (OR=0.85; 95% CI: 0.72-0.99), who reside in food desert versus non-food desert. No statistically significant differences were observed for the Mediterranean dietary pattern. Residents living in food deserts had lower adherence to healthy dietary pattern than residents not living in food deserts; the association may vary by race, education, and region.Entities:
Keywords: Census tract; Diet; Dietary patterns; Food desert
Year: 2018 PMID: 31467800 PMCID: PMC6714990
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Food Public Health ISSN: 2162-8440
Mediterranean Diet Score Assignment Scheme
| Mediterranean Diet Component | Score Assignment |
|---|---|
| Fruits | 0=Below median, 1= At or above median |
| Vegetables | 0=Below median, 1= At or above median |
| Legumes | 0=Below median, 1= At or above median |
| Cereals | 0=Below median, 1= At or above median |
| Fish | 0=Below median, 1= At or above median |
| Meat | 1=Below median, 0= At or above median |
| Dairy Products | 1=Below median, 0= At or above median |
| Ratio of monounsaturated fats to saturated fats | 1=Belowmedian, 0=Atorabove sex-specific median |
| Alcohol[ | 1=Moderate consumption, 0=Zero or above moderate consumption |
Women:0–7 drinks/week, Men: 0–14 drinks/week
Descriptive characteristics by residence in a food desert census tract in the REGARDS Study, 2003–2007[a]
| Participant characteristics | Not a food desert | Food desert | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, y, mean (SD) | 64.9 (9.3) | 64.7 (9.1) | 0.29 |
| Sex, n (%) | <0.01 | ||
| Male | 7,287 (44.7) | 1,170 (40.6) | |
| Female | 9,007 (55.3) | 1,715 (59.5) | |
| Race, n (%) | <0.01 | ||
| Black | 4,921 (30.2) | 1,644 (57.0) | |
| White | 11,373 (69.8) | 1,241 (43.0) | |
| Income, n (%) | <0.01 | ||
| Less than $20k | 2,306 (14.2) | 707 (24.5) | |
| $20k–34k | 3,800 (23.3) | 781 (27.1) | |
| $35k–$74k | 5,224 (32.1) | 800 (27.7) | |
| $75k and above | 3,030 (18.6) | 273 (9.5) | |
| Refused | 1,934 (11.9) | 324 (11.2) | |
| Education, n (%) | <0.01 | ||
| Less than high school | 1,389 (8.5) | 437 (15.2) | |
| High School graduate | 8,453 (51.9) | 1,627 (56.4) | |
| College graduate or above | 6,452 (39.6) | 821 (28.5) | |
| Region, n (%) | <0.01 | ||
| Southeast[ | 8,746 (53.7) | 1,887 (65.4) | |
| Outside the southeast | 7,548 (46.3) | 998 (34.6) | |
| RUCA, n (%) | 0.03 | ||
| Isolated or Small rural | 1,453 (8.9) | 258 (8.9) | |
| Large rural | 2,033 (12.5) | 310 (10.8) | |
| Urban | 12,808 (78.6) | 2,317 (80.3) | |
| Relationship Status, n (%) | <0.01 | ||
| Married | 10,236 (62.8) | 1,534 (53.2) | |
| Divorced | 2,232 (13.7) | 480 (16.6) | |
| Other | 276 (1.7) | 80 (2.8) | |
| Single | 817 (5.0) | 181 (6.3) | |
| Widowed | 2,733 (16.8) | 610 (21.1) |
There were 30,239 participants in the REGARDS study; 56 anomalies were excluded, 2,906 were excluded for missing geocodes, 8.090 for missing dietary information, and 8 for missing covariates, which left 19,179 for the current analysis. RUCA, rural-ruban commuting area; REGARDS, REasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke
Southeast: Louisiana, Arkansas, Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina
The association between residence in a food desert census tract and adherence to the Southern, Plant-based, and Mediterranean dietary patterns in the REasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) Study
| Southern Pattern | Plant Based Pattern | Mediterranean Pattern | |
|---|---|---|---|
| OR(95% CI) | OR[ | OR[ | |
| All Participants | - | - | 0.86 |
| | |||
| Less than High School | 1.24 | 0.97 | 0.81 |
| High School Graduate | 1.41 | 0.88 | 0.93 |
| College Graduate and Above | 1.91 | 0.87 | 0.88 |
| | |||
| Less than High School | 0.90 | 1.13 | 0.75 |
| High School Graduate | 1.02 | 1.03 | 0.85 |
| College Graduate and Above | 1.38 | 1.01 | 0.80 |
| Residence in the southeast | 1.25 | 1.05 | 0.90 |
| Residence outside the southeast | 1.22 | 0.85 | 0.78 |
Abbreviations: OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval
Note: Unless indicated, interactions between food desert residence and covariates (race, education, and region) were not statistically significant. If interaction was present, overall associations were not presented.
The reference group for all ORs is participants in the respective strata, who do not live in food deserts. Models adjusted for age, sex, race, income, education, region, RUCA, relationship status
Adjusted for age, sex, race, income, education, RUCA, relationship status
Significant race-food desert interaction, p=0.0005; Significant education-food desert interaction, p=0.003
Significant region-food desert interaction, p=0.03