. 2017 Jun 5;20(12):2079–2095. doi: 10.1017/S1368980017000994

Table 2.

Summary of population and design characteristics of the studies sorted according to quality scores

Study	Year(s)	Population	Sample size	Age (years)	Study design
Aljuraiban et al. (2015)⁽ ²⁴ ⁾	1996–1999	Women and men from INTERMAP	2696	40–59	Cross-sectional
Murakami & Livingstone (2015)⁽ ¹² ⁾	2003–2012	Women and men from NHANES 2003–2012	18 696	≥60	Cross-sectional
Gigante et al. (1997)⁽ ⁴² ⁾	1994	Brazilian women and men	1035	20–69	Cross-sectional
Karatzi et al. (2015)⁽ ²⁹ ⁾	NA	Greek women and men	164	Mean 46·8 (sd 9·3)	Cross-sectional
Oliveira et al. (2009)⁽ ⁴⁴ ⁾	NA	Brazilian women and men	570	19–59	Cross-sectional
Kant et al. (1995)⁽ ¹⁵ ⁾	1971–1975 to 1982–1984	Women and men from NHANES I and NHEFS	7147	25–74	Prospective: 8–10-year follow-up
Holmback et al. (2010)⁽ ¹⁰ ⁾	1991–1995	Women and men from Sweden Diet and Cancer cohort	3009	47–68	Cross-sectional
Kim et al. (2014)⁽ ¹⁴ ⁾	2005	Women and men from Third Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey	4625	≥19	Cross-sectional
Mohindra et al. (2009)⁽ ²⁵ ⁾	1998–1991	US adults from Louisiana Bogalusa Heart Study	504	19–28	Cross-sectional
Howarth et al. (2005)⁽ ¹⁷ ⁾	1994–1996	Women and men from US Continuing Survey of Food Intake	2685	Younger: 20–59 Older: 60–90	Cross-sectional
Ma et al. (2003)⁽ ⁹ ⁾	NA	American women and men	299	20–70	Cross-sectional
Mills et al. (2011)⁽ ⁴⁰ ⁾	2008	American women	1099	40–60	Cross-sectional
Smith et al. (2012)⁽ ¹¹ ⁾	2004–2006	Australian women and men	2775	26–36	Cross-sectional
Titan et al. (2011)⁽ ³⁰ ⁾	1993 and 1997	Women and men from Norfolk cohort of EPIC	14 666	45–75	Cross-sectional
Yannakoulia et al. (2007)⁽ ³² ⁾	NA	Greek women	64 pre- and 50 postmenopausal	24–74	Cross-sectional
Murakami and Livingstone (2014)⁽ ³⁸ ⁾	2000–2001	British women and men	1487	19–64	Cross-sectional
Berg et al. (2009)⁽ ³¹ ⁾	2001–2004	Swiss women and men	3610	25–74	Cross-sectional
Drummond et al. (1998)⁽ ⁸ ⁾	NA	Women and men workers of Scotland	95	Mean 20 (sd 55)	Cross-sectional
Marín-Guerrero et al. (2008)⁽ ³³ ⁾	1999	Spanish women and men	34 974	25–64	Cross-sectional
Peixoto et al. (2007)⁽ ⁴³ ⁾	2001	Brazilian women and men	1252	20–64	Cross-sectional
Ruidavets et al. (2002)⁽ ³⁶ ⁾	1996–1997	French men	330	45–64	Cross-sectional
Teichmann et al. (2006)⁽ ³⁹ ⁾	NA	Brazilian women	981	20–60	Cross-sectional
van der Heijden et al. (2007)⁽ ¹³ ⁾	1992–2002	Men from HPSF	20 064	46–81	Prospective: 10-year follow-up
Bachman et al. (2011)⁽ ²⁶ ⁾	2006–2007	American women and men	257	18–65	Cross-sectional
Bertéus Forslund et al. (2005)⁽ ³⁴ ⁾	Reference: 1994–1999 Obese: 1997–2001	Swiss women and men	Obese: 4470 Reference: 1092	Obese: 30–60 Reference: 37–60	Cross-sectional
Bertéus-Forslund et al. (2002)⁽ ³⁵ ⁾	Obese: 1994–1999 Reference: NA	Swiss obese women	Obese: 83 Reference: 94	37–60	Cross-sectional
Metzner et al. (1997)⁽ ⁶ ⁾	1967–1969	American women and men	2028	35–69	Cross-sectional
Pearcey and de Castro (2002)⁽ ²⁷ ⁾	NA	Women and men from research pool at Georgia State University	19 weight-gaining men and women and 19 weight-stable	NA	Cross-sectional
Reicks et al. (2014)⁽ ²⁸ ⁾	2013	American women and men	2702	18–80	Cross-sectional
Amosa et al. (2001)⁽ ³⁷ ⁾	1994	Polynesian and European women	82	18–27	Cross-sectional
Al-Isa (1999)⁽ ⁴¹ ⁾	1997–1998	Kuwait women and men university students	842	18–23	Cross-sectional

NA, not available; INTERMAP, International Study on Macro/Micronutrients and Blood Pressure; NHANES, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey; NHEFS, NHANES Epidemiologic Follow-up Study; EPIC, European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition; HPSF, Health Professionals Follow-up Study.