Table 2.
ORs (95%CIs) for cognitive dysfunction according to tertile of energy-adjusted dietary hardness.
| Dietary Hardness | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 (n = 498) | T2 (n = 498) | T3 (n = 498) | P for Trend a | ||
| Cognitive dysfunction, n (%) b |
42 | (8.2) | 32 (6.4) | 38 (7.6) | |
| Model 1 c | 1 | (reference) | 0.72 (0.45 1.17) | 0.86 (0.54 1.36) | 0.55 |
| Model 2 d | 1 | (reference) | 0.77 (0.47 1.26) | 0.87 (0.54 1.41) | 0.73 |
| Model 3 e | 1 | (reference) | 0.72 (0.43 1.21) | 0.79 (0.43 1.46) | 0.57 |
CIs: confidence intervals; ORs: odd ratios; T, tertile. a Logistic regression model was performed with energy-adjusted dietary hardness as a continuous variable. b Participants who scored ≤ 13 points on the MSP-1100 were defined as having a cognitive dysfunction [24,26]. c Adjusted for age (years, continuous). d Adjusted for variables in Model 1 and BMI (kg/m2, continuous), education (<10, 10–12, or ≥13 years), current employment (yes or no), living alone (yes or no), smoking (current or past/non-smoking), alcohol consumption (none, >0 to <46, or ≥46 g/day), habitual exercise (yes or no), hypertension (yes or no), diabetes (yes or no), depressive symptoms (yes or no), dietary counselling (yes or no), and energy intake (kcal, continuous). e Adjusted for variables in Model 2 and energy-adjusted intakes of n-3 PUFA, vitamins A, D, E, B6, B12, and C, and folate (unit/1000 kcal, continuous).