Skip to main content
. 2022 Jun 20;26(5):1006–1013. doi: 10.1017/S1368980022001422

Table 3.

Results of multinomial logistic regression analyses of the association between meat consumption and prediabetes or diabetes among community-dwelling adults in rural Khánh Hòa province, Vietnam (2019–2020), excluding participants receiving treatment for diabetes medication (n 2907)

Prediabetes Diabetes mellitus
Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2
n n Relative-risk ratios 95 % CI Relative-risk ratios 95 % CI n Relative-risk ratios 95 % CI Relative-risk ratios 95 % CI
1. Red/processed meat consumption
  0–99 g 1944 905 1·00 (Ref.) 1·00 (Ref.) 148 1·00 (Ref.) 1·00 (Ref.)
  100–199 g 651 323 1·18 0·98, 1·42 1·25 1·02, 1·55 40 0·93 0·53, 1·62 1·06 0·64, 1·74
  ≥ 200 g 312 173 1·58 1·19, 2·09 1·66 1·19, 2·33 26 1·53 1·05, 2·22 1·75 1·32, 2·33
P trend = 0·003 P trend = 0·004 P trend = 0·329 P trend = 0·045
2. Poultry consumption
  0–99 g 1447 731 1·00 (Ref.) 1·00 (Ref.) 104 1·00 (Ref.) 1·00 (Ref.)
  100–199 g 1099 495 0·84 0·66, 1·07 0·86 0·70, 1·05 87 1·08 0·90, 1·29 1·12 0·90, 1·40
  200–299 g 202 100 0·92 0·71, 1·20 0·92 0·77, 1·10 11 0·77 0·46, 1·31 0·71 0·50, 1·01
  ≥ 300 g 159 75 0·87 0·58, 1·32 0·84 0·57, 1·22 12 1·06 0·48, 2·37 0·88 0·39, 2·01
P trend = 0·294 P trend = 0·183 P trend = 0·989 P trend = 0·669

The results are shown as relative-risk ratios and corresponding 95 % CI.

Model 1 was adjusted for age, age squared term and sex, while model 2 was further adjusted for other socio-demographic variables (education, occupation and household income), lifestyle variables (smoking status, alcohol consumption, physical activity, sleeping hours, fruit consumption, vegetable consumption and sweetened beverage consumption) and health-related variables (BMI, hypertension, dyslipidaemia and family history of diabetes). When the consumption of red/processed meat and poultry was examined, the exposures were simultaneously incorporated into the models.