| Literature DB >> 32299509 |
Zahra Yari1, Makan Cheraghpour2, Vahideh Aghamohammadi3, Meysam Alipour4, Nila Ghanei5, Azita Hekmatdoost6.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the present study was to determine the association between energy-dense nutrient-poor snacks intake and the risk of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) in Iranian adults. For this purpose, a total of 143 cases with a newly confirmed diagnosis of NAFLD and 471 controls free of the disease were studied. Dietary intake was assessed using a food frequency questionnaire.Entities:
Keywords: Energy-dense snack; Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease; Nutrient-poor snack
Year: 2020 PMID: 32299509 PMCID: PMC7164180 DOI: 10.1186/s13104-020-05063-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Res Notes ISSN: 1756-0500
Basic characteristics and dietary intakes of study participants by quartiles of total energy-dense nutrient-poor snacks
| Quartiles of total energy-dense nutrient-poor snacks | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quartile 1 (n = 155) | Quartile 2 (n = 153) | Quartile 3 (n = 153) | Quartile 4 (n = 153) | ||
| Cases (n) | 31 | 28 | 34 | 50 | 0.013 |
| Age (year) | 41.68 ± 9.57 | 39.99 ± 9.46 | 38.18 ± 9.35 | 35.84 ± 9.64 | < 0.001 |
| Male/female (%) | 46/54 | 51/49 | 42/58 | 57/43 | 0.042 |
| Weight (kg) | 78.66 ± 16.17 | 76.47 ± 14.66 | 78.60 ± 15.8 | 81.4 ± 16.47 | 0.071 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 28.34 ± 5.14 | 27.8 ± 4.64 | 28.59 ± 5.68 | 28.61 ± 6.44 | 0.424 |
| Physical activity (MET) | 34.01 ± 3.21 | 34.18 ± 3.17 | 33.93 ± 3 | 33.07 ± 3.12 | 0.007 |
| Alcohol (n)* | 6 | 22 | 13 | 21 | 0.006 |
| Dietary factors | |||||
| Total energy intake (kcal) | 2556.33 ± 764.25 | 2732.64 ± 823.97 | 2895.42 ± 716.03 | 3387.51 ± 974.86 | < 0.001 |
| Energy-dense nutrient-poor snack (% energy) | 1.56 ± 0.93 | 3.69 ± 1.62 | 6.14 ± 2.67 | 9.74 ± 5.13 | < 0.001 |
| Carbohydrate (% energy) | 57.77 ± 6.84 | 57.89 ± 11.59 | 56.89 ± 7.17 | 55.94 ± 5.65 | 0.027 |
| Simple sugar (g) | 132.66 ± 80.9 | 132.61 ± 52.89 | 136.31 ± 48.68 | 159.28 ± 51.56 | < 0.001 |
| Dietary fiber (g/1000 kcal) | 16.06 ± 4.76 | 15.83 ± 4.88 | 15.27 ± 5.25 | 13.11 ± 4.08 | < 0.001 |
| Total fat (% energy) | 31.67 ± 6.37 | 32.56 ± 5.48 | 33.38 ± 5.62 | 33.48 ± 4.56 | 0.002 |
| SFA (% energy) | 7.96 ± 3.19 | 8.77 ± 3.41 | 8.88 ± 3.6 | 8.54 ± 3.39 | 0.126 |
| MUFA (% energy) | 10.04 ± 2.16 | 10.56 ± 2.04 | 10.73 ± 1.93 | 10.82 ± 1.8 | < 0.001 |
| PUFA (% energy) | 12.1 ± 5.53 | 12.52 ± 6.76 | 12.65 ± 6.23 | 11.69 ± 5.6 | 0.618 |
| Protein (% energy) | 14.7 ± 2.82 | 14.57 ± 2.6 | 14.51 ± 2.53 | 14.62 ± 2.64 | 0.763 |
BMI body mass index, MET metabolic equivalent task, SFA saturated fatty acid, MUFA mono-unsaturated fatty acid, PUFA poly-unsaturated fatty acid
aData are presented as mean ± SEM or number
bLinear regression
* Numbers indicate the number of people who consumed alcohol. This amount of alcohol consumption in men was less than 20 g/day and in women was less than 10 g/day
Odds and 95% confidence interval for occurrence of the NAFLD in each quartile categories of snack consumption
| Quartiles of total energy-dense nutrient-poor snacks | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 (n = 155) | Q2 (n = 153) | Q3 (n = 153) | Q4 (n = 153) | ||
| Biscuits and cakes | |||||
| Model 1 | Ref | 0.53 (0.31–0.93) | 0.73 (0.43–1.23) | 0.97 (0.58–1.60) | 0.213 |
| Model 2 | Ref | 0.56 (0.31–1.04) | 0.74 (0.40–1.37) | 1.21 (0.65–2.26) | 0.037 |
| Candies and chocolates | |||||
| Model 1 | Ref | 0.47 (0.28–0.82) | 0.51 (0.30–0.86) | 0.96 (0.51–1.40) | 0.458 |
| Model 2 | Ref | 0.58 (0.316–1.05) | 0.60 (0.31–1.15) | 0.92 (0.85–0.99) | 0.169 |
| Salty snacks | |||||
| Model 1 | Ref | 0.65 (0.39–1.11) | 0.79 (0.47–1.34) | 0.87 (0.52–1.46) | 0.507 |
| Model 2 | Ref | 0.67 (0.37–1.29) | 0.72 (0.36–1.37) | 0.85 (0.46–1.54) | 0.424 |
| Soft drinks | |||||
| Model 1 | Ref | 0.28 (0.15–0.56) | 1.23 (0.81–2.16) | 1.38 (0.82–2.32) | 0.087 |
| Model 2 | Ref | 0.33 (0.16–0.68) | 1.24 (0.67–2.30) | 1.64 (0.82–2.65) | 0.005 |
| Total snacks | |||||
| Model 1 | Ref | 0.89 (0.51–1.58) | 1.14 (0.66–1.98) | 1.94 (1.16–3.26) | 0.015 |
| Model 2 | Ref | 0.92 (0.48–1.77) | 1.18 (0.63–2.19) | 2.27 (1.19–4.31) | 0.001 |
Model 1: Crude
Model 2: Adjustment for age, sex, body mass index (kg/m2), physical activity (MET-h/wk), alcohol, energy intake (kcal/day)
aBased on multiple logistic regression model