Table 2.
Odds ratios of possible cataract by quartiles of DDS among whole samples.
| Variables | Quartiles of DDS | P trend | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | ||
| Total DDS | (0, 4] | (4, 5] | (5, 7] | (7, 10] | |
| Model 1 | 1.00 | 0.83*** (0.79, 0.88) | 0.78*** (0.75, 0.82) | 0.59*** (0.56, 0.62) | <0.001 |
| Model 2 | 1.00 | 0.84*** (0.79, 0.89) | 0.81*** (0.77, 0.85) | 0.64*** (0.60, 0.69) | <0.001 |
| Model 3 | 1.00 | 0.85*** (0.80, 0.91) | 0.84*** (0.79, 0.88) | 0.68*** (0.64, 0.73) | <0.001 |
| Model 4 | 1.00 | 0.87*** (0.82, 0.93) | 0.87*** (0.82, 0.91) | 0.74*** (0.69, 0.79) | <0.001 |
| Animal-based DDS | (0, 1] | (1, 2] | (2, 3] | (3, 4] | |
| Model 1 | 1.00 | 0.87*** (0.82, 0.91) | 0.85*** (0.81, 0.89) | 0.80*** (0.75, 0.85) | <0.001 |
| Model 2 | 1.00 | 0.84*** (0.79, 0.89) | 0.85*** (0.80, 0.89) | 0.79*** (0.74, 0.84) | <0.001 |
| Model 3 | 1.00 | 0.86*** (0.81, 0.90) | 0.88*** (0.83, 0.93) | 0.85*** (0.79, 0.91) | <0.001 |
| Model 4 | 1.00 | 0.88*** (0.83, 0.93) | 0.91*** (0.86, 0.96) | 0.90** (0.84, 0.96) | <0.001 |
| Plant-based DDS | (0, 2] | (2, 3] | (3, 4] | (4, 6] | |
| Model 1 | 1.00 | 0.83*** (0.79, 0.87) | 0.69*** (0.65, 0.72) | 0.47*** (0.44, 0.51) | <0.001 |
| Model 2 | 1.00 | 0.89*** (0.84, 0.93) | 0.74*** (0.70, 0.78) | 0.57*** (0.53, 0.62) | <0.001 |
| Model 3 | 1.00 | 0.90*** (0.85, 0.94) | 0.76*** (0.72, 0.80) | 0.60*** (0.56, 0.65) | <0.001 |
| Model 4 | 1.00 | 0.92** (0.88, 0.97) | 0.79*** (0.75, 0.84) | 0.65*** (0.61, 0.71) | <0.001 |
Model 1 included DDS as the sole variable; Model 2 further controlled for gender, age, and household income; Model 3 additionally controlled for education level, marital status, and pre-retirement occupation; Model 4 added difficulty in physical activities, smoking, and drinking; DDS, dietary diversity score.
***, **, and * represent significance levels of 1%, 5%, and 10%, respectively.