Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Sep 3.
Published in final edited form as: J Nutr Health Aging. 2013;17(6):566–572. doi: 10.1007/s12603-013-0014-y

Table 4. Point estimates1 and 95% confidence intervals for prevalence of chronic disease by dietary pattern for GRAS-2004.

Health outcome Sweets & dairy2 (n = 128) Western2 (n = 62) P-value3
Cardiovascular disease (n = 70)
Model 1 1.51 (0.75-3.04) 2.05 (0.93-4.50) 0.203
Model 2 1.43 (0.69-2.93) 2.06 (0.92-4.65) 0.215
Model 3 1.50 (0.72-3.12) 2.28 (1.00-5.23) 0.146
Type 2 diabetes mellitus (n = 77)
Model 1 0.92 (0.49-1.73) 0.82 (0.39-1.75) 0.881
Model 2 0.81 (0.41-1.57) 0.76 (0.34-1.68) 0.750
Model 3 0.80 (0.41-1.59) 0.79 (0.35-1.80) 0.795
Hypertension (n = 199)
Model 1 2.17 (1.11-4.27) 1.94 (0.87-4.33) 0.045
Model 2 2.17 (1.11-4.27) 1.94 (0.87-4.33) 0.065
Model 3 2.18 (1.11-4.30) 1.95 (0.87-4.35) 0.065
Metabolic syndrome (n = 146)4
Model 1 1.23 (0.68-2.22) 0.90 (0.45-1.78) 0.561
Model 2 1.24 (0.69-2.25) 0.90 (0.45-1.80) 0.553
Model 3 1.24 (0.69-2.26) 0.92 (0.46-1.85) 0.583
Mortality (n = 131)5, 6
Model 1 1.20 (0.76-1.89) 1.00 (0.59-1.69) 0.594
Model 2 1.03 (0.65-1.64) 0.95 (0.55-1.62) 0.928
Model 3 1.02 (0.64-1.63) 0.95 (0.55-1.63) 0.947
1

Odds ratios for cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and metabolic syndrome. Hazard ratios for mortality;

2

Referent group was the ‘Health-conscious’ dietary pattern (n = 70); Model 1: unadjusted model; Model 2: adjusted for age, gender, physical activity (PASE score), smoking, and waist circumference; Model 3: additionally adjusted for same covariates as model 2 with the addition of marital status and education;

3

Type 3 P-value;

4

Analyses for metabolic syndrome were not adjusted for waist circumference as this is included in the diagnosis criteria;

5

Models 2 and 3 were not adjusted for physical activity as this information was unavailable for n = 179;

6

Analysis used n = 446.

HHS Vulnerability Disclosure