. 2011 Jan 17;173(4):448–458. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwq380

Table 2.

Associations^a Between Body Mass Index and Dietary Factors With Various Adjustments for the Plausibility of Reported Energy Intakes in Women With 2.0-Standard-Deviation Cutoffs^b in the Spanish Cohort of the European Investigation Into Cancer and Nutrition, 1992–1996

	Baseline	Goldberg Method		Revised Goldberg Method		Predicted Total Energy Expenditure Method
	Baseline	Restricted	Adjusted	Restricted	Adjusted	Restricted	Adjusted
Model 1^c: n	24,025	17,654	24,025	18,350	24,025	16,826	24,025
R²	0.237	0.252	0.286	0.269	0.312	0.272	0.319
Energy, MJ	−0.10 (0.01)^*	0.31 (0.02)^*	0.39 (0.02)^*	0.42 (0.02)^*	0.52 (0.02)^*	0.63 (0.02)^*	0.65 (0.02)^*
% of fat	0.18 (0.02)^*	0.18 (0.03)^*	0.17 (0.02)^*	0.18 (0.02)^*	0.18 (0.02)	0.18 (0.03)^*	0.19 (0.02)^*
Model 2^c: R²	0.236	0.237	0.268	0.246	0.282	0.237	0.280
Vegetables (tertile 2)	0.15 (0.07)^*	0.10 (0.07)	0.05 (0.06)	0.09 (0.07)	0.06 (0.06)	0.05 (0.08)	0.06 (0.06)
Vegetables (tertile 3)	0.37 (0.07)^*	0.07 (0.08)	0.06 (0.07)	0.01 (0.08)	0.05 (0.07)	0.03 (0.08)	0.05 (0.07)
Fruit (tertile 2): nonsmokers	−0.13 (0.07)^*	−0.17 (0.08)^*	0.18 (0.07)^*	−0.24 (0.08)^*	−0.18 (0.07)^*	0.26 (0.09)^*	−0.21 (0.07)^*
Fruit (tertile 3): nonsmokers	0.00 (0.08)	−0.25 (0.08)^*	−0.31 (0.07)^*	0.32 (0.08)^*	0.33 (0.07)^*	0.36 (0.09)^*	−0.36 (0.07)^*
Fruit (tertile 2): smoking interaction^d	0.34 (0.16)^*	0.35 (0.17)^*	0.36 (0.15)^*	0.45 (0.17)^*	0.38 (0.15)^*	0.46 (0.18)^*	0.39 (0.15)^*
Fruit (tertile 3): smoking interaction^d	0.28 (0.18)	0.43 (0.20)^*	0.35 (0.17)^*	0.48 (0.20)^*	0.35 (0.17)^*	0.44 (0.21)^*	0.35 (0.17)^*
Cakes and pastries (tertile 2)	−0.16 (0.07)^*	0.15 (0.08)^*	0.16 (0.08)^*	0.18 (0.08)^*	0.19 (0.07)^*	0.22 (0.08)^*	0.22 (0.07)^*
Cakes and pastries (tertile 3)	−0.16 (0.07)^*	0.23 (0.07)^*	0.21 (0.06)^*	0.27 (0.07)^*	0.28 (0.06)^*	0.33 (0.07)^*	0.32 (0.06)^*

P < 0.05.

Associations are expressed as β coefficient (standard error) except where noted.

See text and Web Appendix 1 for details on alternative methods used for identifying likely underreporters, plausible reporters, and overreporters.

Both models included adjustment for age, study center, height, activity level, educational level, smoking status, season, alcohol intake, parity, diabetes, and use of special diets. In each model, results were additionally adjusted for all dietary variables shown.

Coefficient (standard error) for smoking × fruit intake tertile interaction term. The body mass index-fruit intake association in smokers was obtained by summing the 2 β coefficients. Coefficients for the relation between body mass index and current smoking in women ranged from −1.26 (standard error, 0.10) to −1.39 (standard error, 0.10) in different models.