| Literature DB >> 34330978 |
Maria J Miele1, Renato T Souza1, Iracema M Calderon2, Francisco E Feitosa3, Débora F Leite1,4, Edilberto A Rocha Filho4, Janete Vettorazzi5, Jussara Mayrink1, Karayna G Fernandes1,6, Matias C Vieira1,7, Rodolfo C Pacagnella1, José G Cecatti8.
Abstract
Assessment of human nutrition is a complex process, in pregnant women identify dietary patterns through mean nutrient consumption can be an opportunity to better educate women on how to improve their overall health through better eating. This exploratory study aimed to identify a posteriori dietary patterns in a cohort of nulliparous pregnant women. The principal component analysis (PCA) technique was performed, with Varimax orthogonal rotation of data extracted from the 24-h dietary recall, applied at 20 weeks of gestation. We analysed 1.145 dietary recalls, identifying five main components that explained 81% of the dietary pattern of the sample. Dietary patterns found were: Obesogenic, represented by ultra-processed foods, processed foods, and food groups rich in carbohydrates, fats and sugars; Traditional, most influenced by natural, minimally processed foods, groups of animal proteins and beans; Intermediate was similar to the obesogenic, although there were lower loads; Vegetarian, which was the only good representation of fruits, vegetables and dairy products; and Protein, which best represented the groups of proteins (animal and vegetable). The obesogenic and intermediate patterns represented over 37% of the variation in food consumption highlighting the opportunity to improve maternal health especially for women at first mothering.Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34330978 PMCID: PMC8324872 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-95185-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Flowchart of the sample (produced by MJ Miele).
Sample distribution according to sociodemographic and anthropometric characteristics. BMI Body Mass Index measured at study entry and last visit before childbirth (Atalah, 1997).
| Maternal features | N | % |
|---|---|---|
| Northeast | 556 | 49 |
| South and Southeast | 589 | 51 |
| < 6,000 (U$) | 47 | 4.1 |
| 6,000–12,000 (U$) | 248 | 21.6 |
| > 12,000–24,000 (U$) | 375 | 32.7 |
| > 24,000 (U$) | 475 | 41.4 |
| Paid work | 579 | 50.5 |
| Housewife | 208 | 18.1 |
| Not working* | 358 | 31.2 |
| With partner | 828 | 72.3 |
| Without partner | 317 | 27.6 |
| White | 442 | 39.0 |
| Black | 114 | 10.1 |
| Brown | 569 | 50.2 |
| Other | 8 | 0.7 |
| < 20 | 284 | 24.8 |
| 20–34 | 779 | 68.0 |
| > 34 | 82 | 7.1 |
| < 9 | 169 | 14.7 |
| 9–12 | 641 | 55.9 |
| > 12 | 335 | 29.2 |
| Low weight | 196 | 17 |
| Adequate | 449 | 40 |
| Overweight | 294 | 26 |
| Obese | 193 | 17 |
| Low weight | 94 | 13 |
| Adequate | 268 | 36 |
| Overweight | 213 | 28 |
| Obese | 196 | 26 |
Profile distribution of food group consumption Interquartile range (IQR).
| Calories (kcal) | Median (IIQ) | Total (%) |
|---|---|---|
| UMPF | 1112.8 (748.2) | 51.93 |
| PF | 590.1 (646.9) | 27.54 |
| UPF | 439.9 (639.3) | 20.53 |
| Grains | 5.6 (4.3) | 93.6 |
| Fruit/vegetables | 5.3 (6.6) | 106.4 |
| Dairy | 1.5 (1.6) | 37.5 |
| Meat/eggs | 2.7 (2.4) | 133.0 |
| Beans | 3.0 (3.4) | 302.0 |
| Fat/sweets | 4.5 (3.3) | 226.5 |
UMPF Unprocessed and minimally processed food, PF processed food, UPF ultra-processed food, Grains foods rich in carbohydrates such as rice, pasta, bread, crackers, corn, potato and other tubers, Fruits/vegetables fruits, leaves and vegetables, Dairy cheese, milk and yoghurts, Meat/eggs animal-based protein including eggs and chicken, cow and pork meat, Beans foods rich in vegetable protein such as beans, soy and peas, Fats/sweet sugars, sweets, desserts and candies, oils, pork lard, butter and margarine. Servings considered adequate for each food group were: grains = 6, beans = 1, fruits and vegetables = 5, Meat/eggs = 2, Dairy = 4, Fat and Sweets (FS) = 2.
Figure 2Perceptual map of interrelationships and correlations between dimensions of dietary patterns. Image obtained from the R software. UMPF Unprocessed and minimally processed food, PF processed food, UPF ultra-processed food, FV fruits and vegetables, Meat meat and eggs, FS fats and sweet.
Figure 3Food groups best represented in correlations of each of the five dimensions of dietary patterns. The image shows the representation of the variables loads for each component on gradual colours white to dark blue (between 0 and 0.78% on the scale). Image obtained from the R software. UMPF Unprocessed and minimally processed food, PF processed food, UPF ultra-processed food, FV fruits and vegetables, Meat meat and eggs, FS fats and sweet.
Factor loadings of food groups in the principal dietary components obtained using PCA. PCA principal component analysis. Result of the extraction of principal components, relabeled according to the characteristics of dietary patterns and scores.
| Groups | Principal component loading | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Obesogenic | Traditional | Intermediate | Vegetarian | Protein | |
| UMPF | 0.247 | 0.232 | 0.120 | 0.027 | |
| PF | − 0.089 | − | 0.066 | − 0.123 | |
| UPF | − 0.378 | − 0.062 | 0.035 | ||
| Grains | 0.194 | − | − 0.118 | − 0.011 | |
| Fruits/vegetables | 0.012 | − 0.023 | 0.135 | − 0.036 | |
| Meat/eggs | 0.247 | 0.291 | 0.011 | − | |
| Dairy | 0.186 | − 0.108 | − 0.095 | 0.203 | |
| Beans | 0.143 | 0.057 | − 0.115 | ||
| Fats/sweets | − 0.388 | − 0.102 | 0.062 | ||
| Eigenvalue variance | |||||
| Cumulative eigenvalue | |||||
In boldface, loads ≥ 0.40 (negative and positive), contribute to the creation of each component.
UMPF Unprocessed and minimally processed food, PF processed food, UPF ultra-processed food, Grains foods rich in carbohydrates. Fruit/Vegetables fruits, leaves and vegetables, Dairy cheese, milk and yoghurt, Meat/eggs eggs and animal-derived meat, Beans beans, soy and peas, Fats/Sweets fats and sugar.
Eigenvalue variance represented the percentage of each diet pattern and cumulative represents the sum of eigenvalues of dietary explanation.