Table 4.
Change (95% CI) in waist circumference, cm | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
N | Tertile 1 | Tertile 2 | Tertile 3 | |
Model 1 | ||||
All | 794 | 1.0 (0.3, 1.7) | 0.4 (−0.2, 1.1) | −0.3 (−1.0, 0.3)‡ |
Men | 374 | 2.2 (1.3, 3.1) | 1.2 (0.2, 2.1) | 1.3 (0.4, 2.2) |
Women | 420 | −0.2 (−1.2, 0.8) | −0.2 (−1.2, 0.7) | −1.6 (−2.4, −0.7)* |
Model 2 | ||||
All | 788 | 0.8 (0.1, 1.5) | 0.4 (−0.2, 1.1) | −0.1 (−0.8, 0.5) |
Men | 373 | 2.1 (1.1, 3.0) | 1.1 (0.2, 2.1) | 1.5 (0.5, 2.4) |
Women | 415 | −0.3 (−1.4, 0.7) | −0.2 (−1.2, 0.7) | −1.5 (−2.3, −0.6) |
Model 1 adjusted for age at baseline, and model 2 for age at baseline plus variables associated with energy-adjusted consumption of pulses at baseline and/or the follow-up outcome in men and/or women (ethnicity, baseline occupational physical activity, smoking, energy-adjusted consumption of vegetables, fiber, potatoes, canned fish and beef).
Significantly different from tertile 1 (P<0.05).
Significantly different from tertiles 1 and 2 (P<0.05).