Table 3.
Pearson’s correlations between pattern scores and energy and energy-adjusted nutrient intakes among a representative sample of Lebanese adolescents (n 446)†
| Dietary patterns | ||
|---|---|---|
| Traditional Lebanese | Western | |
| Energy (kJ) | 0·50**a | 0·75**b |
| Energy (kcal) | 0·50**a | 0·75**b |
| Proteins (g) | 0·41**a | 0·20**b |
| Carbohydrates (g) | 0·15**a | −0·16*b |
| Fat (g) | −0·04 | 0·11* |
| SFA (g) | −0·10*a | 0·13*b |
| n-6 Fatty acids (g) | 0·18** | 0·03 |
| Cholesterol (mg) | 0·19**a | 0·07*b |
| Fibre (g) | 0·40**a | −0·15*b |
| Na (mg) | 0·20**a | −0·06*b |
| Ca (mg) | 0·12*a | −0·46**b |
a,b Values with unlike superscript letters were significantly different (P<0·05; using the Steiger’s Z formula to test the statistical significance of the difference between two dependent correlations).
Significant correlation: * P<0·05, ** P<0·01.
†
Residual energy-adjusted nutrient intake is used( 29 ).