Table 2.
Association of energy-adjusted dietary scores DASH, MMDS, and HNFI (modeled in quartiles and as continuous traits) with all-cause mortality using Cox proportional hazard regression models
| 1-SD increment2 | Quartiles1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 13 | 2 | 3 | 4 | ||
| DASH | |||||
| All individuals, n (%) | 836 (100.0%) | 209 (25.0%) | 209 (25.0%) | 209 (25.0%) | 209 (25.0%) |
| Deceased, n (%) | 93 (11.1%) | 17 (8.1%) | 26 (12.4%) | 28 (13.4%) | 22 (10.5%) |
| Score | 24 [20; 27] | 18 [17; 20] | 22 [21; 23] | 25 [24; 26] | 30 [29; 31] |
| Score (energy-adjusted)4 | 23.7 [20.4; 27.0] | 18.4 [16.6; 19.4] | 22.4 [21.4; 23.0] | 25.2 [24.6; 26.2] | 29.5 [28.2; 30.8] |
| Model 1 | 0.91 [0.74–1.13] | Ref | 0.97 [0.52–1.81] | 1.07 [0.59–1.95] | 0.87 [0.47–1.63] |
| Model 2 | 0.95 [0.77–1.19] | Ref | 1.05 [0.56–1.96] | 1.12 [0.66–2.19] | 1.00 [0.53–1.90] |
| MMDS | |||||
| All individuals, n (%) | 836 (100.0%) | 209 (25.0%) | 209 (25.0%) | 209 (25.0%) | 209 (25.0%) |
| Deceased, n (%) | 93 (11.1%) | 28 (13.4%) | 23 (11.0%) | 24 (11.5%) | 18 (8.6%) |
| Score | 5 [4; 6] | 3 [2; 3] | 4 [4; 4] | 5 [5; 6] | 7 [7; 8] |
| Score (energy-adjusted)4 | 5.0 [3.9; 6.0] | 3.0 [2.2; 3.3] | 4.2 [4.1; 4.7] | 5.2 [5.1; 5.8] | 6.9 [6.2; 7.2] |
| Model 1 | 0.87 [0.71–1.06] | Ref | 0.75 [0.43–1.31] | 0.91 [0.53–1.57] | 0.65 [0.36–1.18] |
| Model 2 | 0.88 [0.72–1.07] | Ref | 0.76 [0.44–1.33] | 0.98 [0.56–1.71] | 0.67 [0.37–1.23] |
| HNFI | |||||
| All individuals, n (%) | 836 (100.0%) | 209 (25.0%) | 209 (25.0%) | 209 (25.0%) | 209 (25.0%) |
| Deceased, n (%) | 93 (11.1%) | 31 (14.8%) | 22 (10.5%) | 25 (12.0%) | 15 (7.2%) |
| Score | 3 [2; 4] | 1 [0; 1] | 3 [2; 3] | 4 [4; 4] | 5 [5; 6] |
| Score (energy-adjusted)4 | 3.1 [2.0; 4.2] | 1.2 [0.7; 1.5] | 2.4 [2.2; 2.8] | 3.5 [3.3; 3.8] | 4.8 [4.4; 5.3] |
| Model 1 | 0.76 [0.62–0.94] | Ref | 0.56 [0.33–0.98] | 0.68 [0.40–1.15] | 0.44 [0.24–0.82] |
| Model 2 | 0.79 [0.64–0.98] | Ref | 0.56 [0.32–0.98] | 0.77 [0.45–1.32] | 0.47 [0.25–0.89] |
Scores are in median [interquartile range] and associations in hazard ratios [95% confidence interval] with bold figures indicating significant associations (p < 0.05)
Model 1: adjusted for sex and age
Model 2: Model 1 further adjusted for body mass index, waist to hip ratio, education, smoking status, total energy intake, and physical activity
DASH Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension, HNFI Healthy Nordic Food Index, MMDS Modified Mediterranean Diet Score, Q quartile, SD standard deviation
1Cut-off values for energy-adjusted dietary pattern scores are as follows: DASH, Q1: 9.91–20.43; Q2: 20.45–23.70; Q3: 23.70–27.01; Q4: 27.05–35.94; MMDS: Q1: 0.80–3.91; Q2: 3.91–4.98; Q3: 4.98–6.00; Q4: 6.00–9.11; HNFI: Q1: -0.74–1.95; Q2: 1.96–3.07; Q3: 3.08–4.17; Q4: 4.18–6.54
2To increase comparability between dietary scores, 1-SD increments of dietary scores were used
3Quartile 1 was set as reference
4For survival analyses, we used dietary scores adjusted for total energy intake using residual method and subsequent addition of a constant based on mean energy intake of the study sample