Table 5.
Quartiles of dietary pattern score | P for trenda | Per SD | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | |||
‘Health-conscious’ dietary pattern | ||||||
Cases/non-cases | 86/984 | 94/1043 | 102/1081 | 109/1051 | ||
Model 1 | 1.00 | 1.02 (0.75–1.38) | 1.05 (0.78–1.43) | 1.10 (0.80–1.50) | 0.52 | 1.03 (0.92, 1.15) |
Model 2 | 1.00 | 0.99 (0.73–1.36) | 1.03 (0.75–1.41) | 1.04 (0.74–1.45) | 0.80 | 1.00 (0.89, 1.13) |
‘Traditional’ dietary pattern | ||||||
Cases/non-cases | 90/1085 | 101/1040 | 103/1009 | 97/1025 | ||
Model 1 | 1.00 | 1.16 (0.86–1.56) | 1.21 (0.90–1.64) | 1.06 (0.77–1.45) | 0.67 | 1.01 (0.90, 1.13) |
Model 2 | 1.00 | 1.20 (0.89–1.63) | 1.24 (0.91–1.69) | 1.11 (0.80–1.54) | 0.49 | 1.02 (0.91, 1.15) |
‘Processed’ dietary pattern | ||||||
Cases/non-cases | 107/1126 | 104/1073 | 92/1028 | 88/932 | ||
Model 1 | 1.00 | 0.98 (0.73–1.30) | 0.89 (0.66–1.21) | 0.86 (0.61–1.21) | 0.33 | 1.00 (0.87, 1.14) |
Model 2 | 1.00 | 0.99 (0.74–1.33) | 0.94 (0.68–1.29) | 0.88 (0.61–1.27) | 0.46 | 1.01 (0.87, 1.17) |
The number of participants included in the analysis was 4491
Multivariable model 1: sex and total energy intake
Multivariable model 2: further adjusted for maternal education, housing tenure at birth, financial difficulty during pregnancy, maternal ethnicity, index of multiple deprivation, rural living location, maternal and paternal history of atopic disease, older sibling, younger sibling, breastfeeding, maternal smoking, vigorous physical activity, history of food allergy, and season when the FFQ was completed
aLinear trend was tested by treating the median values of quartiles as a continuous variable