| Literature DB >> 34444995 |
Jiguo Zhang1, Huijun Wang1, Zhihong Wang1, Feifei Huang1, Xiaofan Zhang1, Wenwen Du1, Chang Su1, Yifei Ouyang1, Li Li1, Jing Bai1, Bing Zhang1, Shufa Du2, Gangqiang Ding1.
Abstract
It is essential to understand the impact of different dietary pattern trajectories on health over time. Therefore, we aimed to explore the long-term trajectories of dietary patterns among Chinese adults and examine the prospective association between different trajectory groups and the risk of overweight/obesity. The sample was 9299 adults aged 18 years or older from the China Health and Nutrition Survey (CHNS) between 1991 and 2018. We used factor analysis to identify dietary patterns and group-based trajectory modeling to identify dietary pattern trajectories. Three trajectories of a southern pattern and a modern pattern and four trajectories of a meat pattern were identified. Participants who followed the highest initial score and a slight decrease trajectory (OR = 1.63; 95% CI: 1.04, 2.54) of the meat dietary pattern were positively associated with risk of overweight/obesity when compared with the lowest initial score trajectory. The southern dietary pattern and the modern dietary pattern trajectories of participants in Group 2 (OR = 0.64; 95% CI: 0.51, 0.81; OR = 0.76; 95% CI: 0.63, 0.91) and Group 3 (OR = 0.71; 95% CI: 0.54, 0.91; OR = 0.64; 95% CI: 0.44, 0.90) were associated with lower risk of overweight/obesity when compared with Group 1. We observed that dietary pattern trajectories have different associations with overweight/obesity among Chinese adults.Entities:
Keywords: Chinese adults; dietary patterns; obesity; overweight; trajectories
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34444995 PMCID: PMC8401187 DOI: 10.3390/nu13082835
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Figure 1Dietary pattern score trajectory groups from 1991 to 2018: (a) southern dietary pattern score trajectory groups; (b) modern dietary pattern score trajectory groups; (c) meat dietary pattern score trajectory groups.
Characteristics of participants by dietary pattern trajectories at baseline.
| Southern Dietary Pattern | Modern Dietary Pattern | Meat Dietary Pattern | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group 1 | Group 2 | Group 3 |
| Group 1 | Group 2 | Group 3 |
| Group 1 | Group 2 | Group 3 | Group 4 |
| |
| N | 2021 | 4382 | 2896 | 7045 | 1818 | 436 | 662 | 4396 | 3728 | 513 | |||
| Age (years) | 40.6 ± 14.5 | 41.8 ± 14.8 | 38.0 ± 12.9 | <0.0001 | 40.0 ± 14.3 | 40.3 ± 13.9 | 46.3 ± 14.9 | <0.0001 | 39.6 ± 12.9 | 40.9 ± 14.2 | 40.3 ± 14.7 | 37.5 ± 13.1 | <0.0001 |
| Female, % | 51.0 | 57.7 | 39.0 | <0.0001 | 49.7 | 52.1 | 54.4 | 0.0487 | 41.5 | 52.0 | 51.8 | 38.0 | <0.0001 |
| Education, high % | 18.7 | 26.2 | 17.0 | <0.0001 | 14.5 | 40.1 | 59.8 | <0.0001 | 6.8 | 15.4 | 30.3 | 33.5 | <0.0001 |
| Income, % | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | ||||||||||
| Low | 41.7 | 24.1 | 35.1 | 37.5 | 13.7 | 5.5 | 49.0 | 38.4 | 22.5 | 12.9 | |||
| Medium | 29.6 | 31.3 | 34.1 | 34.8 | 24.7 | 12.9 | 34.0 | 33.4 | 29.7 | 30.7 | |||
| High | 28.7 | 44.6 | 30.8 | 27.7 | 61.6 | 81.6 | 17.0 | 28.2 | 47.8 | 56.4 | |||
| Urban, % | 25.7 | 38.8 | 16.8 | <0.0001 | 22.4 | 46.5 | 63.5 | <0.0001 | 2.7 | 20.8 | 41.1 | 46.8 | <0.0001 |
| Current smoker, % | 33.6 | 29.0 | 38.3 | <0.0001 | 34.3 | 29.6 | 24.5 | <0.0001 | 42.8 | 32.5 | 30.2 | 43.9 | <0.0001 |
| Current drinker, % | 36.9 | 33.9 | 42.4 | <0.0001 | 37.3 | 36.8 | 36.7 | 0.8913 | 38.7 | 36.6 | 36.0 | 48.6 | <0.0001 |
| Physical activity, % | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | ||||||||||
| Low | 31.8 | 41.6 | 25.1 | 28.4 | 50.7 | 61.5 | 13.2 | 27.4 | 43.5 | 55.3 | |||
| Medium | 36.1 | 31.3 | 37.0 | 34.8 | 32.2 | 31.3 | 33.1 | 35.0 | 33.4 | 33.0 | |||
| High | 32.1 | 27.1 | 37.9 | 36.8 | 17.1 | 7.2 | 53.7 | 37.6 | 23.1 | 11.7 | |||
| Energy (kcal/day) | 2377.8 ± 748.4 | 2206.7 ± 692.4 | 2514.4 ± 699.0 | <0.0001 | 2362.5 ± 725.3 | 2284.0 ± 705.8 | 2204.3 ± 656.0 | <0.0001 | 2594.4 ± 746.5 | 2399.0 ± 728.3 | 2221.6 ± 686.2 | 2362.0 ± 699.5 | <0.0001 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 21.2 ± 1.7 | 20.9 ± 1.8 | 20.7 ± 1.7 | <0.0001 | 20.8 ± 1.7 | 21.2 ± 1.7 | 21.3 ± 1.8 | <0.0001 | 21.0 ± 1.6 | 20.9 ± 1.7 | 20.8 ± 1.8 | 20.8 ± 1.7 | 0.0072 |
Values are mean ± SD for continuous variables and percentage for categorical variables. ANOVA for continuous variables and χ2 for categorical variables.
ORs (95% CI) of overweight/obesity across dietary pattern trajectory groups.
| Group 1 | Group 2 | Group 3 | Group 4 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Southern dietary pattern | ||||
| Model 1 | 1.00 (ref) | 0.45 (0.35, 0.56) *** | 0.51 (0.38, 0.67) *** | / |
| Model 2 | 1.00 (ref) | 0.64 (0.51, 0.81) *** | 0.71 (0.54, 0.91) ** | / |
| Modern dietary pattern | ||||
| Model 1 | 1.00 (ref) | 0.83 (0.68, 1.00) | 0.65 (0.45, 0.93) * | / |
| Model 2 | 1.00 (ref) | 0.76 (0.63, 0.91) ** | 0.64 (0.44, 0.90) * | / |
| Meat dietary pattern | ||||
| Model 1 | 1.00 (ref) | 1.37 (1.05, 1.76) * | 1.37 (1.03, 1.81) * | 2.20 (1.47, 3.26) *** |
| Model 2 | 1.00 (ref) | 1.26 (0.88, 1.78) | 1.26 (0.85, 1.84) | 1.63 (1.04, 2.54) * |
* p < 0.050, ** p < 0.010, *** p < 0.001. All models were constructed using three-level mixed-effects logistic regression. Model 1 adjusted for baseline age, gender, living area, individual income, education level, physical activity, smoking status, alcohol intake, and energy intake. Model 2 additionally adjusted for baseline BMI.