| Literature DB >> 35028517 |
Megan Frances Lee1, Ryan Eather2, Talitha Best2.
Abstract
Plant-based dietary patterns (vegan and vegetarian) are often considered 'healthy' and have been associated with broad health benefits, including decreased risk of obesity and ill health (cardiovascular disease, blood glucose and type II diabetes). However, the association between plant-based diets and mood disorders such as depression remains largely equivocal. This cross-sectional study of 219 adults aged 18-44 (M=31.22, SD=7.40) explored the associations between an estimate of overall plant-based diet quality and depression in vegans (n=165) and vegetarians (n=54). Overall plant-based diet quality was associated with depressive symptoms in vegans and vegetarians F(1, 215)=13.71, p<0.001 accounting for 6% of the variation in depressive symptoms. For those without depression, higher diet quality was protective against depressive symptoms F(1, 125)=6.49, p=0.012. Conversely, for those with depression no association with diet quality was found F(1, 89)=0.01, p=0.963. These findings suggest that a high-quality plant-based diet may be protective against depressive symptoms in vegans and vegetarians. In line with emerging research between food and mental health, higher-quality dietary patterns are associated with a reduced risk of depressive symptoms. Given the rapidly increasing rate of vegan and vegetarian food products within Australia, understanding the potential mechanisms of effects through which a plant-based diet may influence depressive symptoms is required. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.Entities:
Keywords: dietary patterns; mental health
Year: 2021 PMID: 35028517 PMCID: PMC8718860 DOI: 10.1136/bmjnph-2021-000332
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMJ Nutr Prev Health ISSN: 2516-5542
Sociodemographic, health, and lifestyle characteristics per dietary pattern category
| Dietary pattern | Vegetarian | Vegan | Full sample | Test statistic |
| Gender (n, %) | χ2=1.33 | |||
| Female | 51 (23.3) | 152 (69.4) | 203 (92.7) | |
| Male | 3 (1.4) | 9 (4.1) | 12 (5.5) | |
| Transgender/non-binary | 0 (0.0) | 4 (1.9) | 4 (1.9) | |
| Marital status (n, %) | χ2=1.37 | |||
| Partnered | 33 (15.1) | 115 (52.5) | 148 (67.6) | |
| Unpartnered | 21 (9.6) | 50 (22.8) | 71 (32.4) | |
| Highest educational level (n, %) | χ2=3.10 | |||
| High school | 4 (1.8) | 28 (12.8) | 32 (14.6) | |
| University degree | 46 (21.0) | 128 (58.4) | 174 (79.5) | |
| Trade certificate | 4 (1.8) | 9 (4.1) | 13 (5.9) | |
| Health compared with peers (n, %) | F=7.90 | |||
| Very good | 12 (5.5) | 70 (32.0) | 82 (37.4) | |
| Good | 25 (11.4) | 60 (27.4) | 85 (38.8) | |
| Fair | 7 (3.2) | 18 (8.2) | 25 (11.4) | |
| Sometimes good sometimes poor | 8 (3.7) | 13 (5.9) | 21 (9.6) | |
| Poor | 2 (0.9) | 4 (1.8) | 6 (2.7) | |
| Age (years; M, SD) | 33.39 (7.53) | 30.52 (7.25) | 31.22 (7.40) | F=6.28* |
| BMI (kg/m2; M, SD) | 26.76 (8.78) | 24.51 (5.18) | 25.06 (6.30) | F=5.20* |
| DST (M, SD) | 72.72 (12.36) | 77.69 (10.23) | 76.47 (10.98) | F=8.63** |
| Physical activity | 13.70 (8.90) | 13.90 (9.94) | 13.85 (9.67) | F=0.02 |
| CESD-20 | 19.22 (13.23) | 15.31 (11.09) | 16.27 (11.74) | F=4.59* |
*P<0.05, **p<0.01.
BMI, body mass index; CESD, Centre for Epidemiological Science Depression Scale; DST, dietary screening tool; M, Mean.
Correlation matrix
| CESD-20 | DST | BMI | Age | Gender | Physical activity | Marital status | |
| DST | −0.25** | ||||||
| BMI | 0.22* | −0.25** | |||||
| Age | −0.13 | 0.07* | 0.25** | ||||
| Gender | 0.15 | −0.11 | 0.09 | 0.11 | |||
| Physical activity | −0.14 | 0.29** | −0.15 | −0.07 | −0.08 | ||
| Marital status | 0.07 | −0.04 | −0.01 | −0.12 | −0.02 | 0.03 | |
| Education level | 0.02 | 0.12 | 0.05 | 0.15* | 0.01 | −0.07 | 0.02 |
*P<0.05, **p<0.01.
BMI, body mass index; CESD-20, Centre for Epidemiological Studies Depression; DST, Dietary Screening Tool.
Coefficients of the model predicting DST in CESD-20
| Variable | β | t | sr2 | R | R2 | Adj.R2 |
| Step 1 | ||||||
| DST | −0.25 | −3.70** | −0.25 | 0.25 | 0.06 | 0.06 |
| Step 2 | ||||||
| DST | −0.20 | −3.00* | −0.20 | 0.30 | 0.09 | 0.08 |
| BMI | 0.17 | 2.54* | 0.17 |
*P<0.05, **p<0.01.
BMI, body mass index; CESD-20, Centre for Epidemiological Studies Depression; DST, Dietary Screening Tool.
Coefficients of the model predicting DST, split by clinical cut-off of CESD-20
| Variable | β | t | sr2 | R | R2 | Adj.R2 |
| No depressive symptoms | ||||||
| Step 1 | ||||||
| DST | −0.22 | −2.55* | −0.22 | 0.22 | 0.05 | 0.04 |
| Step 2 | ||||||
| DST | −0.22 | −2.48* | −0.22 | 0.23 | 0.05 | 0.04 |
| BMI | 0.06 | 0.66 | 0.06 | |||
| Depressive symptoms | ||||||
| Step 1 | ||||||
| DST | 0.01 | 0.05 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.00 | −0.01 |
| Step 2 | ||||||
| DST | 0.07 | 0.78 | 0.08 | 0.23 | 0.05 | 0.03 |
| BMI | 0.29 | 2.19* | 0.23 |
*P<0.05,.
BMI, body mass index; CESD-20, Centre for Epidemiological Studies Depression 20 Items; DST, Dietary Screening Tool.